Taipei Medical University

A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z
Li YC
------>authors3_c=
------>paper_class1=1
------>Impact_Factor=4.304
------>paper_class3=2
------>paper_class2=5
------>vol=
------>confirm_bywho=None
------>insert_bywho=bebble
------>Jurnal_Rank=2.2
------>authors4_c=
------>comm_author=1
------>patent_EDate=None
------>authors5_c=
------>publish_day=1
------>paper_class2Letter=None
------>page2=
------>medlineContent=
------>unit=E0700
------>insert_date=20090512
------>iam=1
------>update_date=None
------>author=???
------>change_event=1
------>ISSN=
------>authors_c=Li YC
------>score=-74
------>journal_name=British Journal of Surgery
------>paper_name=Using information technology to improve surgical safety.
------>confirm_date=None
------>tch_id=084004
------>pmid=19722742
------>page1=379
------>fullAbstract=CONTEXT: The Joint Commission and the College of American Pathologists have emphasized improved communication as a strategy to improve patient safety and reduce errors. OBJECTIVE: To determine current policies and practices concerning critical and/or significant and unexpected results in anatomic pathology. DESIGN: A survey was distributed with the 2007 D mailing of the Performance Improvement Program slides. The survey included questions that determined laboratory size, practice setting, and anatomic pathology critical and/or significant and unexpected result policies and practices. RESULTS: Surveys from 1130 laboratories were received. A total of 75% had a written policy regarding anatomic pathology critical and/or significant and unexpected results; 25% did not. A total of 30% of laboratories with written policies stated that their policies included guidelines but did not include specific examples. A total of 33% listed 5 or fewer specific examples, 18% listed more than 5 examples, and 19% stated that they had a specifically defined list of significant and unexpected and/or critical diagnoses. The conditions that were listed included malignancies (48% of all laboratories), findings not expected by the clinical history (45%), life-threatening infections (45%), no chorionic villi in products of conception (37%), inflammatory or immunologic processes (19%), and organ rejection (14%). Laboratories with a higher median number of accessioned surgical and cytology cases and independent laboratories tended to have policies with more than 5 specific examples or precise lists of must-call diagnoses (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: This survey illustrates current anatomic pathology policies and practices with respect to critical and significant and unexpected results.
------>tmu_sno=None
------>sno=21916
------>authors2=Hsu MH
------>authors3=
------>authors4=
------>authors5=
------>authors6=
------>authors6_c=
------>authors=Li YC
------>delete_flag=0
------>SCI_JNo=None
------>authors2_c=Hsu MH
------>publish_area=0
------>updateTitle=Significant and unexpected, and critical diagnoses in surgical pathology: a College of American Pathologists~ survey of 1130 laboratories.
------>language=2
------>check_flag=None
------>submit_date=None
------>country=None
------>no=92
------>patent_SDate=None
------>update_bywho=None
------>publish_year=2005
------>submit_flag=None
------>publish_month=1
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z