Format

Send to

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
J Urol. 2001 Jun;165(6 Pt 1):1957-9.

Second opinion of anatomical pathology: a complex issue not easily reduced to matters of right and wrong.

Author information

1
Department of Pathology, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, Florida, USA.

Abstract

PURPOSE:

We discuss the subject of a second opinion for interpretations of anatomical pathology from the perspective of patient care.

MATERIALS AND METHODS:

We grouped 150 cases involving pathological review at our institution into 3 categories depending on the effect on patient care.

RESULTS:

Of 29 interpretive discrepancies 14 resulted in treatment changes but 7 of these 14 may have been interpreted differently by other practice groups.

CONCLUSIONS:

Whether the second opinion represents an interpretive error or a legitimate difference of opinion, the result may affect patient care. Patients referred for treatment among practice groups should have pathological findings reviewed as part of a complete assessment by the new physicians.

PMID:
11371888
[Indexed for MEDLINE]
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments
How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Loading ...
    Support Center