| From: | "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@ahs.llumc.edu]
Sent:
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