[Histonet] QM Dashboard

Blazek, Linda lblazek at digestivespecialists.com
Tue Jun 12 13:34:20 CDT 2018

I completely agree with you on the recut issue but I separate the recuts by Quality Issue and just a deeper section.  If a section is folded, has chatter or some other quality issue then I think it needs addressed as a Quality Management issue.

Linda Blazek HT (ASCP)
Pathology Lab Manager
GI Pathology of Dayton
Digestive Specialists, Inc
Phone: (937) 396-2623
Email: lblazek at digestivespecialists.com

-----Original Message-----
From: Terri Braud via Histonet [mailto:histonet at lists.utsouthwestern.edu] 
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2018 2:21 PM
To: 'histonet at lists.utsouthwestern.edu'
Subject: Re: [Histonet] QM Dashboard

We use: 
1.	Report TAT
2.	Discrepant pathology reports
	a.	Internal vs External report correlation
	b.	Frozen section vs Final diagnosis correlation
	c.	Amended reports
I liked the idea of piece count discrepancy or even poorly processed blocks.  I never recommend using "recuts" as a QM because that is more often a product of the pathologists' preference or desire to see more tissue and does not reflect the quality of the sections (unless it is an incomplete facing issue).  This can quickly become punitive for your department because this information is not presented to people who understand pathology.
My 2 cents. Terri

Terri L. Braud, HT(ASCP)
Anatomic Pathology Supervisor
Holy Redeemer Hospital
1648 Huntingdon Pike
Meadowbrook, PA 19046
ph: 215-938-3689
fax: 215-938-3874
Care, Comfort, and Heal

Histonet mailing list
Histonet at lists.utsouthwestern.edu

More information about the Histonet mailing list