Histopathology departments already audit diagnostic errors

BMJ 1996;313:117 (13 July)

Letters

Histopathology departments already audit diagnostic errors

EDITOR,--John Warden, in his report on diagnostic errors madeby locum consultant histopathologist Dr Samuel Kiberu, repeatedlyasserts that there are no comparative data on mistakes in pathologicaldiagnoses and states that the report on this case calls fornew research.¹ The research that has already taken place, bothin Britain and in the United States, seems to have been overlooked.In 1986 a review of 12 934 cases in the British Army HistopathologyRegistry detected 521 diagnoses (4.0%) that contained an error;141 of these errors (1.1%) were classed as "clinically significant"and were likely to have affected the patient's care.² In anaudit of 518 cases in Southampton in 1993, errors were foundin 20 cases (3.8%), and in six (1.2%) the error was judged tobe clinically significant.³ Two pathology departments in theUnited States have reported the effects of appointing an extrasenior pathologist to check . . . [Full text of this article]

Add to CiteULike CiteULike Add to Complore Complore Add to Connotea Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us Add to Digg Digg Add to Reddit Reddit Add to StumbleUpon StumbleUpon Add to Technorati Technorati What's this?

Relevant Article

Campaign aims to make the English more active: Daphne Gloag
BMJ 1996 312: 799. [Extract] [Full Text]

This article has been cited by other articles:

McMunn, A., Nazroo, J., Breeze, E. (2009). Inequalities in health at older ages: a longitudinal investigation of the onset of illness and survival effects in England. Age Ageing 38: 181-187 [Abstract] [Full text]
Schroter, S, Plowman, R, Hutchings, A, Gonzalez, A (2006). Reporting ethics committee approval and patient consent by study design in five general medical journals. J. Med. Ethics 32: 718-723 [Abstract] [Full text]
Kirkham, N. (2000). The pathologist in the 21st century--generalist or specialist?. J. Clin. Pathol. 53: 7-9 [Full text]