Difference between revisions of "Pathology reports"

Jump to navigation Jump to search
343 bytes removed ,  19:39, 29 April 2025
no edit summary
Line 73: Line 73:
===Amendment===
===Amendment===
*Formally ''report amendment''.
*Formally ''report amendment''.
*Used to change the [[diagnosis]] or significant interpretations in the report.
*Used to change the [[diagnosis]] ''or'' significant interpretations in the report.


==Dealing with errors==
==Dealing with errors and when to use an amendment==
{{Main|Quality}}
{{Main|Quality}}


===Addendum versus amendment for errors===
*If an addendum would add information to the report that contradicts other information already in the report: it should be an amendment (not an addendum).<ref name=pmid25357114>{{cite journal |authors=Babwah JP, Khalifa M, Rowsell C |title=Analysis of addenda in anatomic pathology as a quality monitoring initiative |journal=Arch Pathol Lab Med |volume=138 |issue=11 |pages=1514–9 |date=November 2014 |pmid=25357114 |doi=10.5858/arpa.2012-0412-OA |url=}}</ref>
Addendum:
*PROS:
**Report has not been changed per se.
*CONS:
**Report confusing - as it contains contradictory information.
**Risk of misinterpretation higher - as the addendum may not be read.
 
Amendment:
*PROS:
**Revised diagnosis is apparent.
*CONS:
**Change in report may not be apparent -- depends on information management system.
 
====Bottom line====
If an addendum adds information to the report that contradicts other information: it should be an amendment (not an addendum).<ref name=pmid25357114>{{cite journal |authors=Babwah JP, Khalifa M, Rowsell C |title=Analysis of addenda in anatomic pathology as a quality monitoring initiative |journal=Arch Pathol Lab Med |volume=138 |issue=11 |pages=1514–9 |date=November 2014 |pmid=25357114 |doi=10.5858/arpa.2012-0412-OA |url=}}</ref>


It is good practice when amending an report to:
It is good practice when amending an report to:
49,267

edits

Navigation menu