Improving the quality of surgical pathology reports for breast cancer: A centralized audit with feedback

Archives of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine

Volumn 132, Issue 9, 2008, Pages 1428-1431

  Onerheim, Ronald ^a   Racette, Pierre ^b   Jacques, André ^b   Gagnon, Robert ^b  

^a ST MARY S HOSPITAL   (Canada)

^b Direction de l'Amélioration de l'Exercice   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BREAST CANCER; CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEM; HOSPITAL; LYMPHATIC SYSTEM; MASTECTOMY;

BREAST NEOPLASMS; FEEDBACK; FEMALE; HUMANS; MEDICAL AUDIT; PATHOLOGY, SURGICAL; QUEBEC;

EID: 51349087716     PISSN: 00039985     EISSN: 15432165     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (14)

1. Dauphinee D. Revalidation of doctors in Canada. BMJ. 1999;318:1188-1190.
2. Collège des médecins du Québec. Application québécoise d'un modèle canadien pour la surveillance et l'amélioration de la performance des médecins en exercice. Le Collège. 1997;36(4):24-27.
3. Recommandations pour l'étude en pathologie des lésions mammaires détectées par mammographie dans le cadre du dépistage systématique du cancer du sein. Montreal, Canada: L'Association des pathologists du Québec; 1997.
4. Association of Directors of Anatomic and Surgical Pathology. Recommendations for the reporting of breast carcinoma. Mod Pathol. 1996;9:77-81.
5. Connolly J. Recommendations for the reporting of breast carcinoma. Pathol Case Rev. 1998;3:241-247.
6. Henson DE, Oberman HA, Hutter RVP. Practice protocol for the examination of specimens removed from patients with cancer of the breast; a publication of the Cancer Committee, College of American Pathologists, members of the Cancer Committee, College of American Pathologists, and the Task Force for Protocols on the Examination of Specimens from Patients with Breast Cancer. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 1997;12:27-33.
7. Fitzgibbons PL, Connolly JL, Page DL. Updated protocol for the examination of specimens from patients with carcinomas of the breast. Cancer Committee. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2000;124:1026-1033.
8. Nakhleh RE, Jones B, Zarbo RJ. Mammographically directed breast biopsies: a College of American Q-probes study of clinical physician expectations and of specimen handling and reporting characteristics in 434 institutions. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 1997;121:11-18.
9. Kricker A, Armstrong B, Smith C, et al. An audit of breast cancer pathology reporting in Australia in 1995. Br J Cancer. 1999;80:563-568.
10. Carney PA, Eliassen MS, Wells WA, Swartz WG. Can we improve breast pathology reporting practices? A community-based breast pathology quality improvement program in New Hampshire. J Community Health. 1998;23(2):85-98.
11. Imperato PJ, Waisman J, Wallen MD, Llewellyn CC, Pryor V. Improvements in breast cancer pathology practices among medicare patients undergoing unilateral extended simple mastectomy. Am J Med Quality. 2003;18:164-169.
12. Wilkinson NW, Shahryarinejad AZ, Winston JS, Watroba N, Edge SB. Concordance with breast cancer pathology reporting practice guidelines. J Am Coll Surg. 2003;196:38-43.
13. Cancer Care Ontario. Cancer System Quality Index; completeness of pathology reporting. Available at: http://www.cancercare.on.ca/qualityindex2007/ measurement/pathologyReports/index.html. Accessed November 14, 2007.
14. Cook TD, Compbell DT. Quasi-Experimentation: Design and Analysis Issues for Field Settings. Boston, Mass: Houghton-Mifflin; 1979.