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.     

A case of purulent pneumococcal pericarditis

Background

Purulent bacterial pericarditis is a rare and potentially fatal disease. The course may be fulminant, and the presentation may pose a diagnostic challenge.

胸腔镜下心包厚壁囊肿切除术1例报告

面对来势汹汹的新型冠状病毒肺炎(COVID-19),如何能够正确、快速诊断和筛检出确诊病例显得尤为重要,国内诸多科技工作者都在积极开展相关的诊断试验研究。本文回顾了目前正在开展的十余项诊断试验的注册信息,针对其中存在的共性问题进行了讨论,重点阐述了如何使用PICOS原则构造COVID-19诊断试验的研究问题,还对金标准的设置、受试者的代表性、样本量计算和同步、独立、盲法的测定等诊断试验的设计要点进行了详细说明。旨在为广大研究者提供开展COVID-19诊断试验的设计建议,帮助研究者在顶层设计阶段减少、避免偏倚,完成高质量的临床研究,为临床诊疗提供循证医学证据。     

Conserving resources in the diagnosis of intraoral fibroepithelial polyps

Fibroepithelial polyps (FEPs) are common, benign intraoral lesions that tend to develop slowly at predictable sites, often in response to local irritation or trauma. Historical precedent often results in referral to oral and maxillofacial surgery (OMFS) departments for biopsy, often irrespective of symptoms, and histological assessment. OMFS and pathology services are struggling to cope with an increasing workload that will potentially lead to widespread delays to diagnosis and treatment. Over the past 20 years, clinical pathways and guidance have been developed to ensure that healthcare interventions, such as the removal of third molars, tonsils, skin tags, and benign moles, are evidence-based, have a net patient benefit, and ensure the best use of finite NHS resources. However, no such guidance exists for intraoral lesions and we regard this as an oversight. We analysed the removal of 682 FEPs over a seven-year period and report sensitivities of 92.4% for a “confirmed clinical suspicion of an FEP” and 99.7% for a “confirmed clinical suspicion of a benign diagnosis”. The incidence of non-benign disease was 0.3%. Primary care dentists should be able to diagnose and monitor FEPs and refer only if symptoms are serious or in high-risk patients or sites. Adopting this practice across the UK could free up to 1825 four-hour OMFS clinics, 405 hours of consultant histopathologists’ time, and recurring savings to the NHS estimated to be in the region of £620 000/annum. We believe that the removal of FEPs should be reclassified as an “intervention not normally funded”, and the time and resources put to better use treating patients with lesions of questionable pathology.     

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.