[Histonet] embedding like specimens sequentially

[Morken, Tim - Labvision]

Shiela, 
 
That's what QA programs are for.
 
The problem is that even if you can document one or more mistakes you can't
really say for sure if it is because of sequential grossing of like
specimens unless you have data showing that. It could just be coincidental.
You would have to show that such mistakes happen predominately when like
specimens are grossed sequentially. 
 
If you have a QA program you can make this potential problem part of that as
a QA monitor in order to document the problem. Followup on all
mis-identification mistakes (and be sure to document those that are caught
in the lab - not just those that reach a pathologist) and determine their
place in the grossing order (is that possible with your methods?). Then
follow trends of mistakes and try to assign the trend to specific practices.
That is the only way to show the magnitude of any problem. 
 
 
Tim Morken
Lab Vision / NeoMarkers
www.labvision.com
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Tague, Curtis [mailto:CTague <@t> ahs.llumc.edu] 
Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2003 11:40 AM
To: Tapper, Sheila
Cc: Histonet (E-mail)
Subject: RE: [Histonet] embedding like specimens sequentially
 
I'd have your pathologist put the hammer down. He or she would no doubt be
happy to see you're desire to improve quality control and reduce the chance
any mix up that could lead to legal problems. Explain to them the risks and
I'm sure they'll back you. 
 
curt
-----Original Message-----
From: histonet-admin <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
[mailto:histonet-admin <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu]On Behalf Of Tapper, Sheila
Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2003 10:21
To: histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
Subject: [Histonet] embedding like specimens sequentially
Can anyone give me a literature reference that delineates the reasons and
process for embedding non-like specimens sequentially?  We are trying to
address our PA's ordering cervical biopsies followed by endocervical
curettage biopsies, and breast masses followed by breast core biopsies,
etc..  The only thing that seems to drive change is documented literature,
not histotechs telling them that this is poor practice, and potential a
legal problem.  I don't need case studies - WE all know them - I need hard
and fast rules.  
 
Thank you in advance!
 
Sheila Tapper HT(ASCP)
St. Luke's Hospital
 
 
Confidentiality Note:
The preceding e-mail message (including any attachments) contains
information that may be confidential, protected by applicable legal
privileges, or constitute non-public information. It is intended to be
conveyed only to the designated recipient(s). If you are not an intended
recipient of this message, please notify the sender by replying to this
message and then delete it from your system. Use, dissemination,
distribution or reproduction of this message by unintended recipients is not
authorized and may be unlawful.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/pipermail/histonet/attachments/20031119/f474b4ee/attachment.htm