April 29, 2013

Guideline Title

Consensus statement on effective communication of urgent diagnoses and significant, unexpected diagnoses in surgical pathology and cytopathology from the College of American Pathologists and Association of Directors of Anatomic and Surgical Pathology.

Bibliographic Source(s)

Nakhleh RE, Myers JL, Allen TC, DeYoung BR, Fitzgibbons PL, Funkhouser WK, Mody DR, Lynn A, Fatheree LA, Smith AT, Lal A, Silverman JF. Consensus statement on effective communication of urgent diagnoses and significant, unexpected diagnoses in surgical pathology and cytopathology from the College of American Pathologists and Association of Directors of Anatomic and Surgical Pathology. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2012 Feb;136(2):148-54. [34 references] PubMed External Web Site Policy

Guideline Status

This is the current release of the guideline.

2012 Feb;136(2):148-54. doi: 10.5858/arpa.2011-0400-SA. Epub 2011 Oct 13.

Consensus statement on effective communication of urgent diagnoses and significant, unexpected diagnoses in surgical pathology and cytopathology from the College of American Pathologists and Association of Directors of Anatomic and Surgical Pathology.

Nakhleh RE, Myers JL, Allen TC, DeYoung BR, Fitzgibbons PL, Funkhouser WK, Mody DR, Lynn A, Fatheree LA, Smith AT, Lal A, Silverman JF.

Source

Department of Pathology, Mayo Clinic Florida, Jacksonville, 32224, USA. Nakhleh.raouf@mayo.edu

Erratum in

Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2012 Apr;136(4):342.

Abstract

CONTEXT:

Recognizing the difficulty in applying the concept of critical values to anatomic pathology diagnoses, the College of American Pathologists and the Association of Directors of Anatomic and Surgical Pathology have chosen to reevaluate the concept of critical diagnoses.

OBJECTIVE:

To promote effective communication of urgent and significant, unexpected diagnoses in surgical pathology and cytology.

DESIGN:

A comprehensive literature search was conducted and reviewed by an expert panel.

RESULTS:

A policy of effective communication of important results in surgical pathology and cytology is desirable to enhance patient safety and to address multiple regulatory requirements.

CONCLUSIONS:

Each institution should create its own policy regarding urgent diagnoses and significant, unexpected diagnoses in anatomic pathology. This policy should be separate from critical results or panic-value policies in clinical pathology, with the expectation of a different time frame for communication. Urgent diagnosis is defined as a medical condition that, in most cases, should be addressed as soon as possible. Significant, unexpected diagnosis is defined as a medical condition that is clinically unusual or unforeseen and should be addressed at some point in the patient's course. Further details of this statement are provided.