Frequency of Mislabeled Specimen in a Histopathology Laboratory

Muhammad Nazmul Baqui, Sharmin Rozhana, R. C. Rajib, M. M. Huda, Mohammad Mesbahuzzaman, T. K. Paul
{"title":"Frequency of Mislabeled Specimen in a Histopathology Laboratory","authors":"Muhammad Nazmul Baqui, Sharmin Rozhana, R. C. Rajib, M. M. Huda, Mohammad Mesbahuzzaman, T. K. Paul","doi":"10.3329/jss.v17i2.43726","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Mislabeled specimens are one of the most common pre-analytic errors in a histopathology laboratory. As histopathology provides the final diagnosis for most of the diseases, labeling errors can lead to serious consequences leading to wrong treatments. \nObjectives: This study was carried out to find common pre-analytical errors of histopathology laboratory in the context of our country. \nMethods: Data were collected on six points of container labeling and nine points of requisition papers through simple check list over a period of one week. \nResults: Among 142 samples, labeling was found in 82.40% container. Among these labels, patients name, age, hospital registration number of the patients were absent in 19.01%, 26.06% and 90.85% samples respectively. Site of origin of the tissue in the container was absent in 71.83% samples. About 4.93% samples came to the laboratory without fixatives. Patients name, age, sex, site of origin of tissue, name of the referring physician and their contact numbers were found absent in 0.70%, 3.52%, 33.10%, 7.75%, 50% and 95.77% of requisition papers respectively. Clinical diagnosis was absent in 54.23% cases. A good proportion of container and requisition papers did not contain proper labeling, which is important not only for identification but also for histopathological diagnosis. \nConclusion: We believe that, these errors occur due to lack of standard histopathology requisition form. Association of Surgeons and Pathologists can collaboratively form a standard requisition form for sending histopathology samples to different laboratories, which could easily reduce mislabeling errors in histopathology. \nJournal of Surgical Sciences (2013) Vol. 17 (2) :80-83","PeriodicalId":33248,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Surgical Sciences","volume":"74 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-10-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Surgical Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3329/jss.v17i2.43726","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Mislabeled specimens are one of the most common pre-analytic errors in a histopathology laboratory. As histopathology provides the final diagnosis for most of the diseases, labeling errors can lead to serious consequences leading to wrong treatments. Objectives: This study was carried out to find common pre-analytical errors of histopathology laboratory in the context of our country. Methods: Data were collected on six points of container labeling and nine points of requisition papers through simple check list over a period of one week. Results: Among 142 samples, labeling was found in 82.40% container. Among these labels, patients name, age, hospital registration number of the patients were absent in 19.01%, 26.06% and 90.85% samples respectively. Site of origin of the tissue in the container was absent in 71.83% samples. About 4.93% samples came to the laboratory without fixatives. Patients name, age, sex, site of origin of tissue, name of the referring physician and their contact numbers were found absent in 0.70%, 3.52%, 33.10%, 7.75%, 50% and 95.77% of requisition papers respectively. Clinical diagnosis was absent in 54.23% cases. A good proportion of container and requisition papers did not contain proper labeling, which is important not only for identification but also for histopathological diagnosis. Conclusion: We believe that, these errors occur due to lack of standard histopathology requisition form. Association of Surgeons and Pathologists can collaboratively form a standard requisition form for sending histopathology samples to different laboratories, which could easily reduce mislabeling errors in histopathology. Journal of Surgical Sciences (2013) Vol. 17 (2) :80-83
组织病理学实验室中错误标记标本的频率
背景:错标标本是组织病理学实验室最常见的分析前错误之一。由于组织病理学为大多数疾病提供了最终诊断,标记错误可能导致严重后果,导致错误的治疗。目的:探讨我国组织病理学实验室分析前常见错误。方法:在一周的时间内,对集装箱标签的6个点和申请单的9个点进行简单的核对。结果:142个样品中,82.40%的容器有标签。在这些标签中,患者姓名、年龄、医院注册号缺失的样本分别为19.01%、26.06%和90.85%。在71.83%的样本中,容器中组织的起源部位缺失。约4.93%的样品未带固定剂进入实验室。患者姓名、年龄、性别、组织来源、转诊医师姓名和联系电话的缺失率分别为0.70%、3.52%、33.10%、7.75%、50%和95.77%。临床诊断缺失54.23%。一个良好的比例的容器和申请单没有包含适当的标签,这是重要的,不仅对鉴定,而且对组织病理学诊断。结论:我们认为,这些错误的发生是由于缺乏标准的组织病理学申请表。外科医生和病理学家协会可以合作形成一个标准的组织病理学样品发送到不同实验室的申请单,这可以很容易地减少组织病理学的误标错误。外科杂志(2013)Vol. 17 (2):80-83
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
6
审稿时长
6 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信