Another argument for patient's access to their test results

Rob Bell rmsbell at ESEDONA.NET
Mon Apr 21 18:19:57 UTC 2014


Agree. See my recent post - the whole system is screwed up in every direction! Are we just as guilty as the tech? Our errors are non-deliberate but is that an excuse?

Rob

Sent from my iPhone

> On Apr 21, 2014, at 9:00 AM, "Hamm, Robert M. (HSC)" <Robert-Hamm at OUHSC.EDU> wrote:
> 
> Overwhelmed with work. Still there is an important distinction between “overwhelmed with work and so fails to notice something” and “overwhelmed with work and so chooses not to do something”. Perhaps there should be a “Fuck this job” button and whenever somebody slams it, someone comes in non-punitively to make the system work. It is a sign of a failure of management (allocating tasks and responsibilities to people psychologically capable of handling at the moment), as well as of failure on the part of the worker.
>  
> From: Robert Bell [mailto:rmsbell at ESEDONA.NET] 
> Sent: Monday, April 21, 2014 9:48 AM
> To: IMPROVEDX at LIST.IMPROVEDIAGNOSIS.ORG
> Subject: Re: [IMPROVEDX] Another argument for patient's access to their test results
>  
> I see the report says that the technologists motivation was that she was overwhelmed with work. One of the standard causes to the background of many errors in medicine.
>  
> Rob Bell
> 
> Sent from my iPad
> 
> On Apr 21, 2014, at 6:39 AM, Leonard Berlin <lberlin at LIVE.COM> wrote:
> 
> Mark,
>  
> There is no question that the technologists's actions were far worse than negligent -- they were blatantly criminal.  I cannot figure out how the mammography facility (I'm not sure whether it's a hospital or not) allowed this to happen.  A radiologist is required to interpret every mammogram, but in this case it appears (although available facts are vague) that the tech herself routinely classified these mammograms as "normal," without a radiologist ever seeing them.  Federal  law mandates that mammography facilities send to every patient who has undergone a mammography exam a summary  written in lay language of her mammographic report.  I presume that the 1000-plus women received letters stating their mammograms were normal.  Indeed, a terrible situation!  It is inexcusable that the facility had so little oversight and supervision that it allowed a situation like this to occur.
>  
> Lenny
>  
>  
> Leonard Berlin, MD, FACR
> Radiology department, Skokie Hospital
> Skokie, IL;
> Professor of Radiology
> Rush University, and
> University of Illinois
> Chicago, IL
>  
> > Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2014 23:02:50 -0400
> > From: Mark.Graber at VA.GOV
> > Subject: [IMPROVEDX] Another argument for patient's access to their test results
> > To: IMPROVEDX at LIST.IMPROVEDIAGNOSIS.ORG
> > 
> > In a very disturbing story this week, a radiology tech was accused of notifying 1000+ women that their mammagrams were normal, although she didn't know this to be true, and some in fact were not. http://www.today.com/video/today/54989210#54989210
> > 
> > Its my understanding that all women are supposed to receive a copy of their test result, and its not exactly clear from this report if the tech just gave women a verbal 'ok', or if she actually altered the radiologist's report. This is a class of diagnostic error I've never encountered before, but I'm hoping that the directly-mailed results mitigated the tech's false assurances. If anyone has access to more facts on this case, I'd be interested to hear them.
> > 
> > 
> > Mark L Graber, MD FACP
> > Senior Fellow, RTI International
> > Professor Emeritus, SUNY Stony Brook School of Medicine
> > Founder and President, Society to Improve Diagnosis in Medicine
> > MARK.GRABER at IMPROVEDIAGNOSIS.ORG
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Moderator: Lorri Zipperer Lorri at ZPM1.com, Communication co-chair, Society for Improving Diagnosis in Medicine
> > 
> > To unsubscribe from the IMPROVEDX list, click the following link:<br>
> > <a href="http://list.improvediagnosis.org/scripts/wa-IMPDIAG.exe?SUBED1=IMPROVEDX&A=1" target="_blank">http://list.improvediagnosis.org/scripts/wa-IMPDIAG.exe?SUBED1=IMPROVEDX&A=1</a>
> > </p>
>  
> 
> 
> To unsubscribe from IMPROVEDX: click the following link:
> http://list.improvediagnosis.org/scripts/wa-IMPDIAG.exe?SUBED1=IMPROVEDX&A=1
> or send email to: IMPROVEDX-SIGNOFF-REQUEST at LIST.IMPROVEDIAGNOSIS.ORG
> 
> Visit the searchable archives or adjust your subscription at: http://list.improvediagnosis.org/scripts/wa-IMPDIAG.exe?INDEX
> 
> Moderator: Lorri Zipperer Lorri at ZPM1.com, Communication co-chair, Society for Improving Diagnosis in Medicine
> 
> To learn more about SIDM visit:
> http://www.improvediagnosis.org/
>  
> 
> 
> To unsubscribe from IMPROVEDX: click the following link:
> http://list.improvediagnosis.org/scripts/wa-IMPDIAG.exe?SUBED1=IMPROVEDX&A=1
> or send email to: IMPROVEDX-SIGNOFF-REQUEST at LIST.IMPROVEDIAGNOSIS.ORG
> 
> Visit the searchable archives or adjust your subscription at: http://list.improvediagnosis.org/scripts/wa-IMPDIAG.exe?INDEX
> 
> Moderator: Lorri Zipperer Lorri at ZPM1.com, Communication co-chair, Society for Improving Diagnosis in Medicine
> 
> To learn more about SIDM visit:
> http://www.improvediagnosis.org/
> 
> 
> 
> To unsubscribe from IMPROVEDX: click the following link:
> http://list.improvediagnosis.org/scripts/wa-IMPDIAG.exe?SUBED1=IMPROVEDX&A=1
> or send email to: IMPROVEDX-SIGNOFF-REQUEST at LIST.IMPROVEDIAGNOSIS.ORG
> 
> Visit the searchable archives or adjust your subscription at: http://list.improvediagnosis.org/scripts/wa-IMPDIAG.exe?INDEX
> 
> Moderator: Lorri Zipperer Lorri at ZPM1.com, Communication co-chair, Society for Improving Diagnosis in Medicine
> 
> To learn more about SIDM visit:
> http://www.improvediagnosis.org/








HTML Version:
URL: <../attachments/20140421/7d5b7b30/attachment.html>


More information about the Test mailing list