Discrepancy analysis, communication, and feedback for cytotechnologist quality improvement of nongynecologic cytopathology.

The Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments of 1988 (CLIA '88) detail the requirements for the cytotechnologist (CT) who evaluates gynecologic cytopathology specimens. However, the role of the CT in nongynecologic cytopathology is not clearly defined. Furthermore, non gynecologic cytopathology cases are diverse and the screening, interpretative, and diagnostic issues may be quite different from the gynecologic cases. At our institution, the CT and pathologist review nongynecologic cytopathology cases. Since CLIA '88 does not require the CT to screen nongynecologic cytopathology cases, there are few guidelines for quality assessment or quality improvement for the CT regarding nongynecologic cytopathology cases. To provide better understanding of the expectations of the CT and the needs of the pathologist, we developed a system comparing the CT's interpretation to the pathologist's interpretation as a means for enhanced communication and feedback. Using our Laboratory Information System (LIS), we generate a daily report that lists all cases with discrepancy in diagnoses between the CT and pathologist. The general supervisor reviews this report for diagnostic discrepancy in each case. To determine the degree of discrepancy, numerical values are assigned to each primary interpretation. Minor discrepancies are defined as differences less than +/-2.0. Major discrepancies are defined as differences greater than or equal to +/-2.0. For the entire laboratory, the overall percentage of concordant cases was consistently above 80% for each of the 6 mo analysis. Regarding the monthly discrepancies, the proportion of minor discrepancies ranged from 11.09% to 15.44% and the proportion of major discrepancies ranged from 1.40% to 3.56%. The frequency distribution of discrepancies by degree approximates a normal (Gaussian) curve and serves as baseline information that may be used for comparison when there are changes in practice or personnel. The CTs attend slide review sessions conducted by the general supervisor for discussion of cases with major discrepancies. The discrepancy data from individual CTs are useful in counseling and recommending areas for improvement. As the CT and pathologist work cooperatively and in tandem, our system allows for a mechanism by which the expectations and needs of pathologist are communicated to the CT more effectively. We believe our process is a fundamental step in improving CT performance in Nongynecologic cytopathology and keeps the CT informed of complexities of nongynecologic cytopathology.