ArticleBMJ quality improvement reports2015
Reducing turnaround time of surgical pathology reports in pathology and laboratory medicine departments.
Article in BMJ quality improvement reports, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- ISUOG/ESGO Consensus Statement on ultrasound-guided biopsy in gynecological oncology.Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology : the official journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology · 2025Guideline
- Beveled Fiber Probe for Improving Spectroscopic Signal Sensing from Bowel Mucosa Tissue.Chemical & biomedical imaging · 2026Article
- Real-Time In Vivo Cellular-Level Imaging During Puncture.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026Article
- Article
- Article
- A retrospective single-centre study on the histological profile of brain and spine tumours at a tertiary hospital in Ghana.Ghana medical journal · 2025Article
- A prospective analysis of lymph node retrieval in colorectal cancer: discrepancies, neoadjuvant impact, and practical implications.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Computational pathology: A survey review and the way forward.Journal of pathology informatics · 2024Review
- Highly Multiplexed Tissue Imaging in Precision Oncology and Translational Cancer Research.Cancer discovery · 2024Review
- Assessment of Turnaround Time (TAT) for Oral Squamous Cell Carcinoma Biopsies: A Single-Institution Experience.Cureus · 2024Article
- Routine Use of a Standardized Mastectomy Diagram by Surgeons Improves Accuracy and Timeliness of the Final Pathological Report.Annals of surgical oncology · 2023Article
- A Comparative Review of ICMR, WHO, and EMA Guidelines for Good Clinical Laboratory Practices.Journal of laboratory physicians · 2023Review
- Current and future perspectives of digital microscopy with fluorescence confocal microscope for prostate tissue interpretation: a narrative review.Translational andrology and urology · 2021Review
- National Thoracic Surgery Standards Implementation: Barriers, Enablers, and Opportunities.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2021Article
- Reflection-mode virtual histology using photoacoustic remote sensing microscopy.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- Ex vivo fluorescence confocal microscopy: prostatic and periprostatic tissues atlas and evaluation of the learning curve.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2020Article
- Implementation of modern tools in autopsy practice-the way towards contemporary postmortal diagnostics.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2019Article
- Reducing delay in laboratory reports for outpatients from 16% to <3% at a non-profit hospital in New Delhi, India.BMJ open quality · 2019Article
- Association of Care Processes With Timely, Equitable Postoperative Radiotherapy in Patients With Surgically Treated Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma.JAMA otolaryngology-- head & neck surgery · 2018Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Turnaround time is an important quality indicator in surgical pathology. Retrospective analysis of three data points in September 2014, January 2015, and February 2015 showed that on average, about a quarter (24%) of routine surgical pathology cases (26%, 19%, and 27% respectively) are not reported on time and do not meet the accepted level of the College of American Pathologists' (CAP) standard turnaround time, which states at least 90% of routine surgical pathology cases should be reported and verified within two days. Our daily observation supported by a root cause analysis exercise revealed that subprocesses including slide allocation and delivery to pathologists, slide review by pathologists, report editing by transcriptionists, and report verification by pathologists are where most delays occur. Thus, to tackle these process issues we developed a quality improvement project using the model of improvement methods to streamline the sample flow process and avoid unjustified reporting delay. The improvement ideas included developing a time log sheet to be attached with all pathology requests, and sending a daily reminder email followed by a phonecall to all pathologists to verify completed reports on the same day. These intervention elements were tested using multiple PDSA cycles resulting in a very noticeable improvement, with more than 94% of all routine cases reported in less than two days, meeting and exceeding the CAP standards. Such noticeable improvement in turnaround of surgical pathology reports will eventually lead to improving the quality and safety of patient care outcome, including diagnosing patients on time, developing the appropriate treatment plan, and avoiding unjustified complications resulting in morbidity and mortality due to delayed reports.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.