Affiliation:
1. From the Department of Pathology, Baptist Hospital of Miami, Miami, Fla (Drs Renshaw and Pinnar); Department of Biostatistics, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC (Mr Jiroutek and Ms Young)
Abstract
Abstract
Context.—Several studies have shown that blinded review, because it is less biased and may improve vigilance, is an excellent method for detecting errors and improving performance in gynecologic cytology. The value of blinded review in surgical pathology is not known.
Objective.—To determine the value of blinded review in surgical pathology.
Methods.—Five hundred ninety-two biopsy cases were reviewed without knowledge of the original diagnosis or history, and the results were compared with those of the original diagnosis.
Results.—Complete agreement was obtained in 567 (96%) of 592 cases. The technique of blinded review of biopsy material had a sensitivity of 98%, failing to identify a lesion in 7 cases; no cases of malignancy were missed. The specificity was 100%. Differences in diagnostic threshold were the most common source of disagreement. False-negative cases were identified by the technique and were clinically significant. Power studies show that the number of cases requiring review to identify significant errors are large, but potentially achievable by blinded review.
Conclusion.—Blinded review is a sensitive and effective method for identifying areas of disagreement, including false-negative cases, and for decreasing errors in surgical pathology biopsy material.
Publisher
Archives of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine
Subject
Medical Laboratory Technology,General Medicine,Pathology and Forensic Medicine
Cited by
23 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献