File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Pathology slide review in gynecologic oncology: Routine or selective?

TitlePathology slide review in gynecologic oncology: Routine or selective?
Authors
KeywordsCost
Pathology review
Selective
Issue Date1999
PublisherAcademic Press. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ygyno
Citation
Gynecologic Oncology, 1999, v. 75 n. 2, p. 267-271 How to Cite?
AbstractObjective. The aims of this study were to assess the cost/benefit ratio for interinstitution pathology consultation (IPC) and to identify the types of specimens with little or no risk of diagnostic error in order to reduce the cost. Methods. All gynecologic oncology referrals having IPC from 1993 to 1998 were reviewed. Each case was evaluated by comparing both the original and the consulted pathology reports. A discrepancy was major if it led to treatment alteration. A minor discrepancy was defined as differences without clinical consequences. Consultation error was determined by comparison with the final diagnosis and clinical data obtained from the records. The cost per review was adjusted to 1998 dollars for all cases over the 5-year study period. Statistical data were obtained by Fisher's exact test and Pearson's correlation test. Results. Five hundred sixty-nine pathology specimens from 498 patients were analyzed in this study. The major discrepancy rate was 6.5% and the minor discrepancy rate was 12.5%. Cytological specimens accounted for no major discrepancy and 13 minor discrepancies compared to 37 major and 58 minor discrepancies in histological specimens. The difference was statistically significant (P = 0.003). Consultation errors occurred in 5 cases with no alteration of clinical care. By excluding cervical and vaginal smears and cervical biopsy specimens in cases with clinically gross tumors, the cost can be reduced by 25% with no detriment to the clinical management. Conclusions. The types of specimens that do not need consultative pathology review include (1) cervical biopsy specimens in those patients with gross tumors and (2) cervical and vaginal smears.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/87314
ISSN
2015 Impact Factor: 4.198
2015 SCImago Journal Rankings: 2.284
ISI Accession Number ID
References

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorChan, YMen_HK
dc.contributor.authorCheung, ANYen_HK
dc.contributor.authorCheng, DKLen_HK
dc.contributor.authorNg, TYen_HK
dc.contributor.authorNgan, HYSen_HK
dc.contributor.authorWong, LCen_HK
dc.date.accessioned2010-09-06T09:28:05Z-
dc.date.available2010-09-06T09:28:05Z-
dc.date.issued1999en_HK
dc.identifier.citationGynecologic Oncology, 1999, v. 75 n. 2, p. 267-271en_HK
dc.identifier.issn0090-8258en_HK
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/87314-
dc.description.abstractObjective. The aims of this study were to assess the cost/benefit ratio for interinstitution pathology consultation (IPC) and to identify the types of specimens with little or no risk of diagnostic error in order to reduce the cost. Methods. All gynecologic oncology referrals having IPC from 1993 to 1998 were reviewed. Each case was evaluated by comparing both the original and the consulted pathology reports. A discrepancy was major if it led to treatment alteration. A minor discrepancy was defined as differences without clinical consequences. Consultation error was determined by comparison with the final diagnosis and clinical data obtained from the records. The cost per review was adjusted to 1998 dollars for all cases over the 5-year study period. Statistical data were obtained by Fisher's exact test and Pearson's correlation test. Results. Five hundred sixty-nine pathology specimens from 498 patients were analyzed in this study. The major discrepancy rate was 6.5% and the minor discrepancy rate was 12.5%. Cytological specimens accounted for no major discrepancy and 13 minor discrepancies compared to 37 major and 58 minor discrepancies in histological specimens. The difference was statistically significant (P = 0.003). Consultation errors occurred in 5 cases with no alteration of clinical care. By excluding cervical and vaginal smears and cervical biopsy specimens in cases with clinically gross tumors, the cost can be reduced by 25% with no detriment to the clinical management. Conclusions. The types of specimens that do not need consultative pathology review include (1) cervical biopsy specimens in those patients with gross tumors and (2) cervical and vaginal smears.en_HK
dc.languageengen_HK
dc.publisherAcademic Press. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ygynoen_HK
dc.relation.ispartofGynecologic Oncologyen_HK
dc.subjectCosten_HK
dc.subjectPathology reviewen_HK
dc.subjectSelectiveen_HK
dc.subject.meshBiopsy - statistics & numerical dataen_HK
dc.subject.meshFemaleen_HK
dc.subject.meshGenital Neoplasms, Female - pathologyen_HK
dc.subject.meshHumansen_HK
dc.subject.meshObserver Variationen_HK
dc.subject.meshReferral and Consultationen_HK
dc.subject.meshVaginal Smears - statistics & numerical dataen_HK
dc.titlePathology slide review in gynecologic oncology: Routine or selective?en_HK
dc.typeArticleen_HK
dc.identifier.openurlhttp://library.hku.hk:4550/resserv?sid=HKU:IR&issn=0090-8258&volume=75&spage=267&epage=271&date=1999&atitle=Pathology+slide+review+in+gynecologic+oncology:+routine+or+selective?en_HK
dc.identifier.emailCheung, ANY:anycheun@hkucc.hku.hken_HK
dc.identifier.emailNgan, HYS:hysngan@hkucc.hku.hken_HK
dc.identifier.authorityCheung, ANY=rp00542en_HK
dc.identifier.authorityNgan, HYS=rp00346en_HK
dc.description.naturelink_to_subscribed_fulltext-
dc.identifier.doi10.1006/gyno.1999.5567en_HK
dc.identifier.pmid10525384en_HK
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-0032692765en_HK
dc.identifier.hkuros48047en_HK
dc.relation.referenceshttp://www.scopus.com/mlt/select.url?eid=2-s2.0-0032692765&selection=ref&src=s&origin=recordpageen_HK
dc.identifier.volume75en_HK
dc.identifier.issue2en_HK
dc.identifier.spage267en_HK
dc.identifier.epage271en_HK
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000083659800015-
dc.publisher.placeUnited Statesen_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridChan, YM=7403676661en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridCheung, ANY=54927484100en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridCheng, DKL=7402806161en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridNg, TY=7402229853en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridNgan, HYS=34571944100en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridWong, LC=7402092003en_HK

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats