Terri, 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: lbla...@digestivespecialists.com -----Original Message----- From: Terri Braud via Histonet [mailto:histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu] Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2018 2:21 PM To: 'histonet@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 Laboratory 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@lists.utsouthwestern.edu http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet _______________________________________________ Histonet mailing list Histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet
