Abstract
In this issue, Prinsloo and Gray report the results of a 137-laboratory audit on clinical authorization using the guidelines and standards from the Royal College of Pathologists. Only 33% of laboratories were found to be compliant with the standards, although many showed evidence of good practice. Clinical authorization is resource-hungry and the question raised by this study is whether adhering to the letter of the standards set by the Royal College of Pathologists is actually in the best interest of the patient and provides overall value for money, when the latter is key to optimizing the quality of service.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
