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
