Clinicopathological consistency in skin disorders: A retrospective study of 3949 pathological reports

Skin Biopsy in the Context of Dermatological Diagnosis: A Retrospective Cohort Study

“…One of these studies measured the diagnostic yield of nondermatologists between 34% to 45% and that of dermatologists being 71% and 75% for inflammatory dermatoses or neoplasms and cysts, respectively [9]. Another study found 76.8% of pathological diagnoses to be consistent with the ones given by the dermatologists [10], whereas a third one measured a clinicopathological agreement of up to 92% with this success being attributed by the author to the close cooperation between the dermatologist and the pathologist [2]. In the present study, which was the largest of this kind to our knowledge, a 68% consistency of clinical and histological diagnoses was observed which is lesser than but in accord with the published data.…”

Dermatopathologists’ Opinions About the Quality of Clinical Information in the Skin Biopsy Requisition Form and the Skin Biopsy Care Process

“…the survey and in existing literature in both dermatology and radiology [4][5][6][7][8][9] include inadequate biopsy specimens, insufficient clinical information in the RFs/provider order entry forms and clinical visit notes, inadequate training of providers (dermatologists and nondermatologists) on how to provide appropriate clinical information, and limitations in existing computerized provider order entry systems in the EMRs. Communication failures in the SBCP may affect the quality and efficiency of dermatopathology diagnoses.…”

Patient safety in dermatologic surgery

“…One recent study found statistically significant differences in accurate clinicopathologic correlation when submitted clinical information was sufficient compared to when it was incomplete or absent. 56 Also, when submitted clinical diagnoses are grossly different from histology or when histology does not match patient characteristics (eg, chronic sun damage in a child), the pathologist should pause and further investigate for potential error. Finally, routine diagnostic slide review of cases before finalizing reports has been shown to reduce the rate of amendments that change the original diagnosis or affect prognostic significance, 53 highlighting another useful intervention.…”