ArticleCureus2025
A Quality Improvement Intervention to Enhance Documentation on Histopathology Request Forms.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction Incomplete histopathology request form documentation can compromise diagnostic accuracy and delay patient management. This study aimed to assess and improve documentation completeness using a structured quality improvement approach. Methods A clinical audit was conducted at a tertiary care hospital using the Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycle. In the first audit cycle, 250 histopathology request forms were reviewed for completeness. Based on the findings, targeted interventions were implemented, including a standardized request form, clinician engagement, and improved accessibility to forms. A second audit cycle assessed 150 forms to evaluate the impact of these interventions. Results Significant improvements were observed across all documentation parameters. Clinical history documentation increased from 0% to 62%, while presenting complaints improved from 3.2% to 73%. Physical examination findings were recorded in 96% of cases compared to 73.6% initially, and radiological findings improved from 44.4% to 95%. Laboratory investigation results increased from 41.2% to 81%, while drug/medication history documentation rose from 6% to 48%. Specimen details also showed improvement, with biopsy time documentation increasing from 3.2% to 66% and provisional diagnosis documentation rising from 49.2% to 78%. Conclusion A structured quality improvement approach led to significant enhancements in documentation completeness. Ongoing audits, clinician training, and digital solutions are recommended for sustaining these improvements.
Indexed as
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.