Journal of Pathology Informatics Journal of Pathology Informatics
Contact us | Home | Login   |  Users Online: 357  Print this pageEmail this pageSmall font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size 


ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2016  |  Volume : 7  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 54

Reporting Gleason grade/score in synoptic reports of radical prostatectomies


1 Department of Pathology, Baptist Hospital, Baptist Health of South Florida Healthcare System, Miami, FL, USA
2 Cancer Services, Baptist Hospital and Baptist Health of South Florida Healthcare System, Miami, FL, USA

Correspondence Address:
Andrew A Renshaw
Department of Pathology, Baptist Hospital, Baptist Health of South Florida Healthcare System, Miami, FL
USA
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/2153-3539.197201

Rights and Permissions

Context: The format of a synoptic report can significantly affect the accuracy, speed, and preference with which a reader can retrieve information. Objective: The objective of this study is to compare different formats of Gleason grading/score in synoptic reports of radical prostatectomies. Methods: The performance of 16 nonpathologists (cancer registrars, MDs, medical non-MDs, and nonmedical) at identifying specific information in various formatted synoptic reports using a computerized quiz that measured both accuracy and speed. Results: Compared to the standard format (primary, secondary, tertiary grades, and total score on separate lines), omitting tertiary grade when "Not applicable" reduced accuracy (72 vs. 97%, P < 0.001) and increased time to retrieve information 63% (P < 0.001). No user preferred to have tertiary grade omitted. Both the biopsy format (primary + secondary = total score, tertiary on a separate line) and the single line format (primary + secondary + (tertiary) -> total score) were associated with increased speed of data extraction (18 and 24%, respectively, P < 0.001). The single line format was more accurate (100% vs. 97%, P = 0.02). No user preferred the biopsy format, and only 7/16 users preferred the single line format. Conclusions : Different report formats for Gleason grading significantly affect users speed, accuracy, and preference; users do not always prefer either speed or accuracy.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed558    
    Printed7    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded167    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 1    

Recommend this journal