Mandatory Second Opinion in Cytopathology

Department of Pathology, University of Iowa Carver College of Medicine, Iowa City, IA 52242, USA.
Cancer (Impact Factor: 4.89). 04/2009; 117(2):82-91. DOI: 10.1002/cncy.20019
Source: PubMed


Mandatory review of outside pathologic material is intended to detect interpretive errors that may have a clinically significant impact on patient care. Prior to definitive treatment of referred patients, the University of Iowa Carver College of Medicine requires a review of pertinent pathologic material previously obtained at outside institutions. The aims of this study were to determine if this local standard of practice has a measurable impact on patient care.
The pathologic diagnoses of 499 second opinion cytology cases seen at the University of Iowa Carver College of Medicine were studied. Each second opinion was classified as "no diagnostic disagreement", "minor disagreement", or "major disagreement" with respect to the originating institution's interpretation. The clinical impact of major disagreement cases was determined by pathologic and clinical follow-up via chart review.
Second opinion cytology resulted in 37 cases (7.4% of total cases) with major diagnostic disagreements. Clinical and pathologic follow-up was available in 30 of the major disagreement cases; second opinion diagnosis was better supported in 22 of these cases compared to the outside diagnosis. The second opinion in 6 major disagreement cases prompted changes in clinical management.
Major disagreements in second opinion cytology are common, likely reflective of the challenges inherent in the interpretation of cytologic specimens. Although mandatory second opinion of outside cytologic material prompted changes in clinical management in only a small fraction of cases (1.2%), this rate was similar to those previously published for surgical pathology second opinion. These findings support the notion that mandatory second opinion policy as an important part of patient care.

Download full-text


Available from: Michael B Cohen, Oct 06, 2014
  • Source
    • "In 1999, The Institute of Medicine report cited a medical error as the cause of death in some 40,000–98,000 Americans each year [8] supporting once more the concept that a further consultation or specialistic SO may be useful and benefit the patient. The expression SO has been widely reported in the fields of histology [9] [10] and pathology [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] where the diagnosis is often difficult and is strongly based on the healthcare professionals' experience. SO on histological specimens is a routinary daily procedure, performed in anatomic pathology practices and it plays a key role in providing the patient with the most accurate diagnosis [20]. "

    Full-text · Article · Mar 2011 · Patient Education and Counseling
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Sun drying and oven drying (50 °C) characteristics of basil (Ocimum basilicum L.) were determined. The effect of these drying methods on the mineral content of fresh, oven dried and the wire basket sun dried basil were compared. Oven drying resulted in increased drying rates and shorter drying time. Basil can be oven dried at 50 °C to 17.31% moisture content after 15 h and can be sun dried to 23.79% moisture content after 28 h. The mineral content of oven dried herbs was higher than sun dried herbs. K, P, Ca, S, Mg, Fe and Al contents were determined as main minerals in both oven and sun dried basil.
    Full-text · Article · Aug 2005 · Journal of Food Engineering
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The importance of interinstitutional consultation (IC) has been documented across a variety of surgical pathology organ systems. However, to the authors' knowledge, few studies exist regarding this practice within cytopathology and specifically within fine-needle aspiration cytology (FNAC). All FNAC cases between September 2002 and January 2007 were reviewed. Original diagnoses and second opinion diagnoses (SODs) were categorized as either no diagnostic disagreement, or minor diagnostic disagreement, or major diagnostic disagreement, and the latter was defined as either a 2-step deviation on a scale of "unsatisfactory, benign, atypical, suspicious, and malignant" or a change in treatment and/or prognosis. Outcome was determined by a review of the electronic medical record. Among 742 FNAC cases from outside laboratories, there were minor disagreements in 132 cases (17.8%) and major disagreements in 69 cases (9.3%) compared with the SODs from the authors' laboratory. Follow-up was available for 60 of 69 major discrepancies. The SOD was supported on follow-up in 65% of major discrepancies, and the initial diagnosis was supported better in 33% of major discrepancies. In 55% of cases in which the original institution diagnosis was supported better, either no case slides were received for examination or the slides contained material that was considered nondiagnostic by the authors. An SOD prompted a change in clinical management in 32 of 742 patients (4.3%). Aspirates that were most prone to change in management or therapy were from the thyroid (13 cases), neck (soft tissue and lymph nodes; 9 cases), salivary gland (2 cases), and liver (2 cases). Of 60 major diagnostic disagreements, board-certified cytopathologists rendered an SOD in 44 cases, and 75% of the diagnoses were supported better by follow-up, whereas pathologists who were not board certified in cytopathology had only 38% of SODs supported. Of 742 FNAC cases, 9.3% had major diagnostic disagreements; and, in 4.3%, patient management and therapy were altered. These results were similar to studies in surgical pathology emphasizing the importance of IC in FNAC. The authors concluded that FNAC IC benefits patient care.
    Preview · Article · Aug 2009 · Cancer
Show more