Diagnostic Accuracy & Pathology Revised Reports: Evidence-Based Guideline Development

Abstract

Listen

Translate article

Abstract Introduction/Objective Diagnostic errors in pathology may have adverse impact on patient outcomes and are often rectified through revised reports (RR). Improving patient outcomes with accurate RR is a tangible yet challenging benefit to assuring continuous quality improvement (CQI). Assessment and elevation of RR optimization requires counterbalance of workflow complexity in the diagnostic reporting domain. Implications inform best-practice guidelines for pathology RR and exemplify improved patient outcomes by driving down negative impacts from diagnostic errors. Methods A “Survey for RR in Pathology: Reality & Best Practices” was sent via email to relevant stakeholders. The 8-item survey was designed by the National Pathology Quality Registry team & ASCP’s Institute for Science, Technology & Policy. The model included quantitative and qualitative feedback to probe current experiences with RR. The survey was open April 1-30, 2019, via Key Survey and used snowball sampling. Results Key results illuminate necessity for RR standardization. Survey findings represent 172 respondents. Ninety- two percent of respondents indicated report accuracy as a major indication for optimizing RR practices & positively impacting patient care. Pathology practices assure appropriate RR by notifying a care provider when a change in diagnosis necessitates RR (89%) & 86% of respondents indicate delineation of RR types (e.g. addenda, amendment). Still 54% of respondents see inappropriate RR use with lack of notification to care providers and 48% indicate no delineation of RR types. This balance-counterbalance highlights deviations from optimized RR and a need for guidelines. Effects on patient care or impact to a patient’s treatment plan was indicated by 43% who affirmed stratification of diagnostic discrepancies as major vs. minor. Solely focusing on changes in diagnosis (benign vs. malignant) was heralded by 19% of respondents as a reason to categorize diagnostic discrepancies. Forty-two percent of respondents indicate data-driven CQI in the RR domain. Conclusion Identified RR practice gaps decrease diagnostic accuracy, confirming the need for optimal RR guidelines. RR guidelines should focus on standardized nomenclature; active dialogue between laboratory team & clinical care partners; streamlined workflows to assure accuracy; & valuing transparency to derive improved patient outcomes based on high-quality diagnostic pathology RR.