A Pre-Protocol/Post-Protocol Quality Improvement Initiative Specific to One Hospital for Security of Pathologic Specimen

ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to reduce errors in a pathologic specimen with the help of a protocol systematizing the pathology specimen management process in the operating room.Materials and methodThis quasi-experimental study was carried out in the operating room unit of a research and training hospital. A protocol systematizing the process of specimen management in secure surgical pathology and prepared in light of the current literature was used as an intervention, and the effectiveness of the protocol was tested.ResultsIt was determined that the rate of adverse events decreased from .3226% (68 of 21,078) to .032% (6 of 18,706) after the protocol systematizing the surgical pathology specimen management process prepared by the researchers, and the protocol was found to be effective by 90% (P = .03).ConclusionBased on the data obtained in this study, we recommend the use of a pathologic specimen management protocol in the operating room.     

Correcting forensic DNA errors

DNA mixture interpretation can produce opposing conclusions by qualified forensic analysts, even within the same laboratory. The long-delayed publication of the National Institutes of Standards and Technology (NIST) study of 109 North American crime laboratories in this journal demonstrates this most clearly. This latest study supports earlier work that shows common methods such as the Combined Probability of Inclusion (CPI) have wrongly included innocent people as contributors to DNA mixtures. The 2016 President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology report concluded, “In summary, the interpretation of complex DNA mixtures with the CPI statistic has been an inadequately specified—and thus inappropriately subjective—method. As such, the method is clearly not foundationally valid” [7]. The adoption of probabilistic genotyping by many laboratories will certainly prevent some of these errors from occurring in the future, but the same laboratories that produced past errors can also now review old cases with their new software—without additional bench work. It is critical that laboratories adopt procedures and policies to do this.     

Rotavirus,vaccine failure or diagnostic error?

Immunochromatography (ICG) is highly used in clinical settings for rotavirus (RV) diagnosis. The specificity of the tests differs by brand type and is not 100%, therefore its use when the prevalence of the disease is low (i.e. in vaccinated children) may result in a proportion of false positive diagnoses.In some areas, vaccine effectiveness studies or surveillance is done using ICG. Our objective was to estimate the validity of ICG test in vaccinated children, and estimate the number of false positive results in the Valencian Region of Spain, where all RV infections are diagnosed using ICG and are not confirmed by PCR.Population based registries were used to identify all results from the RV antigen tests performed between January 2008 and June 2012 in children under 37 months. Hospitalization and vaccination status of the patients were obtained by linking different databases through a unique identification number. The Positive Predictive Value of the ICG test depending on the vaccination status of the child, hospitalization and the rotavirus season was estimated by a Bayesian model of latent classes.Of the 48,833 tests with valid results, 9429 were done in vaccinated children, and of those 3963 (42%) during the rotavirus season. The prevalence of positive results in vaccinated varied from 2.9 to 21.4% of the tests depending on the hospitalization and seasonality. The estimated PPV also varied from 27.1 to 84.6% when stratified by these two parameters. Globally it is calculated that approximately 267 out of the 520 (51.3%) positives in vaccinated children were false positive tests.The large percentage of false positives, due to an excessive number of tests in vaccinated and out of the RV season, if interpreted as vaccine failures, can cause a loss of confidence in the vaccine and lower the estimates of vaccine effectiveness.     

An Environmental Scan of the National and Provincial Diagnostic Reference Levels in Canada for Common Adult Computed Tomography Scans

Several regulatory bodies have agreed that low-dose radiation used in medical imaging is a weak carcinogen that follows a linear, non-threshold model of cancer risk. While avoiding radiation is the best course of action to mitigate risk, computed tomography (CT) scans are often critical for diagnosis. In addition to the as low as reasonably achievable principle, a more concrete method of dose reduction for common CT imaging exams is the use of a diagnostic reference level (DRL). This paper examines Canada's national DRL values from the recent CT survey and compares it to published provincial DRLs as well as the DRLs in the United Kingdom and the United States of America for the 3 most common CT exams: head, chest, and abdomen/pelvis. Canada compares well on the international scale, but it should consider using more electronic dose monitoring solutions to create a culture of dose optimization.