• Alexander Finkelstein, Gillian H Levy, Paul Cohen, Akosua Domfeh, and Vinita Parkash.
• Department of Pathology, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT 06520, USA.
• Am. J. Clin. Pathol. 2012 Apr 1; 137 (4): 606-11.

AbstractAddenda are typically used to report results of additional studies that are delayed relative to histopathologic studies. However, the frequency and pattern of use of addenda have not been previously reported. We studied the dynamics of addenda creation within the same month at 5-year intervals during a 15-year period at our institution. The number of addenda and type and impact of information communicated in addenda were assessed in the month of July in 1993, 1998, 2003, and 2008, and the possible role of addenda in quality improvement was evaluated. Cases with addenda increased from 0.9% in 1993 to 8.6% in 2008. In 5.6% of addenda, there was information that might have been better reported in an amendment, suggesting that criteria for amendments need to be universally implemented. Charting trends and types of addenda offered opportunities for quality improvement by identifying weaknesses in the workflow organization of the laboratory.

5 keywords...

hide…