Register for email alerts and news feeds:
This journal | BMJ Group
rss
Journal of Clinical Pathology 2004;57:27-32; doi:10.1136/jcp.57.1.27
Copyright © 2004 by the BMJ Publishing Group Ltd & Association of Clinical Pathologists.
Journal of Clinical Pathology 2004;57:27-32
© 2004 BMJ Publishing Group Ltd & Association of Clinical Pathologists

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

The impact of involvement of biomedical scientists in specimen dissection and selection of blocks for histopathology: a study of time benefits and specimen handling quality in Ayrshire and Arran area laboratory

F R Duthie1, E R Nairn2, A W Milne2, V McTaggart2, D Topping2

1 Glasgow Royal Infirmary, 84 Castle Street, Glasgow G4 0SF, UK
2 Crosshouse Hospital, Kilmarnock KA2 0BE, UK

Correspondence to:
Correspondence to:
Dr F R Duthie
Department of Pathology, North Glasgow University NHS Trust, Glasgow Royal Infirmary, 84 Castle Street, Glasgow G4, UK; fraserduthie{at}yahoo.co.uk

Aims: To assess possible time benefits of specimen dissection by biomedical scientists (BMSs) and the quality of specimen handling by BMSs, in a department where BMSs trim those specimens requiring simple descriptions, from which standard blocks are taken.

Methods: Specimen handling by BMSs and consultant pathologists was compared. Time taken for each specimen trimmed was recorded prospectively. To determine specimen handling quality, adherence to dissection standard operating procedures (SOPs) was assessed by recording retrospectively whether or not each action in the SOP had been performed. Information on subsequently required extra levels or blocks was recorded.

Results: Analysis of data from 672 specimens trimmed by consultants showed that any given action in the SOPs was performed on average on 60.2% of applicable/assessable specimens; for 660 similar specimens trimmed by BMSs, each action was performed on average on 80.1% of specimens. Of the specimens where data on extra blocks were recorded, extra blocks were required in 3% of those trimmed by pathologists and in 4% of those trimmed by BMSs. Extra levels were required in 12% of those trimmed by pathologists and in 16% of those trimmed by BMSs. BMS trimming saves 16 hours of consultant time each month. The difference between pathologists and BMSs in time for each specimen trimmed is negligible.

Conclusions: The advantages of increased adherence to trimming SOPs and saving consultant time outweigh the relatively small number of extra blocks and levels required when BMSs trim. There is no reduction in quality of dissection.

Keywords: specimen handling; laboratory personnel; surgical pathology; time; workload

Abbreviations: BMS, biomedical scientist; PA, pathologist’s assistant; SOP, standard operating procedure


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?

This Article

Services
Citing Articles
Google Scholar
PubMed
Topic Collections
Bookmark with

Register for free content

The full back archive is now available for all BMJ Journals. Institutional subscribers may access the entire archive as part of their subscription. Personal subscribers will also have access to all content when logged in. Non-subscribers who register have free access to all articles published before 2006 right back to volume 1 issue 1. Register here to access the free archive of all BMJ Journals.

Don't forget to sign up for content alerts so you keep up to date with all the articles as they are published.

Pathology jobs

Pathology jobs