Conformity to guidelines for pathologic examination of the placenta: Rates of submission and listing of clinical indications

Archives of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine

Volumn 127, Issue 2, 2003, Pages 205-207

  Spencer, Michael K ^a   Khong, T Yee ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ADELAIDE   (Australia)

^b WOMEN S AND CHILDREN S HOSPITAL   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COMPUTER SYSTEM; DATA BASE; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; MONITORING; NEWBORN INFECTION; OLIGOHYDRAMNIOS; PLACENTA; PLACENTA DISORDER; PRACTICE GUIDELINE;

DATABASES, FACTUAL; FEMALE; GUIDELINE ADHERENCE; HUMANS; INFANT, NEWBORN; PATHOLOGY, CLINICAL; PLACENTA; PRACTICE GUIDELINES; PREGNANCY;

EID: 0037324193     PISSN: 00039985     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (7)

1. Benirschke K. The placenta in the litigation process. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1990;162:1145-1450.
2. Langston C, Kaplan C, Macpherson T, et al. Practice guideline for examination of the placenta: developed by the Placental Pathology Practice Guideline Development Task Force of the College of American Pathologists. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 1997;121:449-476.
3. Khong TY. From delivery suite to laboratory: optimizing returns from placental examination in medico-legal defence. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 1997;37:1-5.
4. Gersell DJ. ASCP survey on placental examination. American Society of Clinical Pathologists. Am J Clin Pathol. 1998;109:127-143.
5. Badawi N, Kurinczuk JJ, Keogh JM, Chambers HM, Stanley FJ. Why is the placenta being ignored? Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2000;40:343-346.
6. Booth VJ, Nelson KB, Dambrosia JM, Grether JK. What factors influence whether placentas are. submitted for pathologic examination? Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1997;176:567-571.
7. Wright C, Cameron H, Lamb W. A study of the quality of perinatal autopsy in the former Northern region. The Northern Perinatal Mortality Survey Steering Group. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1998;105:24-28.