Support Tests.

Peggy Zuckerman peggyzuckerman at GMAIL.COM
Tue Jan 26 18:41:40 UTC 2016


To Edward;  Not only why would they want to look at films, but also why
would they want to look at patients?

Peggy Zuckerman
www.peggyRCC.com

On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 9:33 AM, Hoffer, Edward P.,M.D. <
EHOFFER at mgh.harvard.edu> wrote:

> Because house staff spend all their time massaging the EMR. Since they
> have been documented to be spending over three times as long at the
> terminal as at the bedside, why would they want to look at films?
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Bob Latino [blatino at RELIABILITY.COM]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 26, 2016 11:54 AM
>
> *To:* IMPROVEDX at LIST.IMPROVEDIAGNOSIS.ORG
> *Subject:* Re: [IMPROVEDX] Support Tests.
>
> If this practice was so effective in the 70's and 80's, why did it fade
> away?
>
>
>
> Why aren't such proven best practices maintained and sustained?
>
>
>
> *Robert J. Latino, CEO*
>
> Reliability Center, Inc.
>
> 1.800.457.0645
>
> blatino at reliability.com
>
> www.reliability.com
>
>
>
> *From:* Albert Wu [mailto:awu at JHU.EDU]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 26, 2016 11:05 AM
> *To:* IMPROVEDX at LIST.IMPROVEDIAGNOSIS.ORG
> *Subject:* Re: [IMPROVEDX] Support Tests.
>
>
>
> I recall doing precisely this while a med student and resident at New York
> Hospital, and Mt Sinai in NYC in the mid 80s
>
>
>
> albert
>
>
>
> *From: *Alan Morris <Alan.Morris at IMAIL.ORG>
> *Reply-To: *"IMPROVEDX at LIST.IMPROVEDIAGNOSIS.ORG" <
> IMPROVEDX at LIST.IMPROVEDIAGNOSIS.ORG>, Alan Morris <Alan.Morris at IMAIL.ORG>
> *Date: *Tuesday, January 26, 2016 at 10:19 AM
> *To: *"IMPROVEDX at LIST.IMPROVEDIAGNOSIS.ORG" <
> IMPROVEDX at LIST.IMPROVEDIAGNOSIS.ORG>
> *Subject: *Re: [IMPROVEDX] Support Tests.
>
>
>
> You may be interested to know that in the 1979s and 1980s we made daily
> rounds with the radiologist and interpreted the films together.  This was
> unequivocally produced remarkable returns and was a good investment of time
> in a high-tech intensive care unit.  Better communication is always
> desirable.  I am reminded of a quote from George Bernard Shaw:
>
>
>
> “The single biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has
> taken place."
>
>
>
> Alan H. Morris, M.D.
>
> Professor of Medicine
>
> Adjunct Prof. of Medical Informatics
>
> University of Utah
>
>
>
> Medical Director, Urban Central Region Pulmonary Function Laboratories
>
> Pulmonary/Critical Care Division
>
> Sorenson Heart & Lung Center - 6th Floor
>
> Intermountain Medical Center
>
> 5121 South Cottonwood Street
>
> Murray, Utah  84157-7000, USA
>
>
>
> Office Phone: 801-507-4603
>
> Mobile Phone: 801-718-1283
>
>
>
>
>
> *From: *Leonard Berlin <lberlin at LIVE.COM>
> *Reply-To: *Society to Improve Diagnosis in Medicine <
> IMPROVEDX at LIST.IMPROVEDIAGNOSIS.ORG>, Leonard Berlin <lberlin at LIVE.COM>
> *Date: *Tuesday, January 26, 2016 at 05:56
> *To: *"IMPROVEDX at LIST.IMPROVEDIAGNOSIS.ORG" <
> IMPROVEDX at LIST.IMPROVEDIAGNOSIS.ORG>
> *Subject: *Re: [IMPROVEDX] Support Tests.
>
>
>
> Without any doubt whatsoever, the radiology literature is replete  in
> confirming that the more clinical information  that is provided to
> radiologists.  the more accurate will be their reports.
>
> Will clinical info on occasion bias the radiologist?  Yes, but very
> rarely.  Any potential "harm" of providing  the radiologist with clinical
> info is far, far,  outweighed by the benefit.
>
> Lenny Berlin, MD
> Professor of Radiology,
> Rush University and
> Uiv. Ill, Chicago
>
>
>
> > Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2016 04:30:40 +0000
> > From: Joe.Grubenhoff at CHILDRENSCOLORADO.ORG
> > Subject: Re: [IMPROVEDX] Support Tests.
> > To: IMPROVEDX at LIST.IMPROVEDIAGNOSIS.ORG
> >
> > Is there not data that indicated that giving more, not less, information
> to a radiologist in a requisition improves the accuracy and clinical
> utility of the interpretation? As an PEM physician I teach the residents
> that our radiology colleagues are consultants just like a cardiologist.
> Call them, ask what the most reliable study is for the clinical question.
> Saves time and money by avoiding unnecessary or inappropriate exams that
> don't resolve or often muddy the clinical picture.
> >
> > Sent from Skynet
> >
> > > On Jan 25, 2016, at 21:12, Elias Peter <pheski69 at GMAIL.COM> wrote:
> > >
> > > I addressed my concerns to the radiologists and pathologists, not the
> hospital. They agreed that changes were needed, did not always agree on
> what changes were needed, and most were willing to try things to see what
> did and didn’t help.
> > >
> > > The administrative structure was not impressed with the clinical
> request that we expend some of the institutions resources (time, IT work,
> communication system to discuss what we were doing) and the requests
> eventually died out.
> > >
> > > I understand the concern that clinical information might bias a
> radiologist’s reading. The same thing could be said about the patient
> history biasing my exam, test ordering, assessment or plan. The purpose of
> information is to point us in some direction. The solution to this is NOT
> to hide clinical information from the radiologist/pathologist (or the
> patient) but to make as much information available to as many people on the
> team as possible.
> > >
> > > Peter Elias
> > >
> > >
> > >> On 2016.01.25, at 9:08 PM, Stefanie Lee <stefanieylee at GMAIL.COM>
> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Part of the issue is framing (addressed in the recent IOM report) -
> > >> the view of the diagnostic specialties as provider of test results,
> > >> which are then used by the primary physician to diagnose the patient -
> > >> versus the pathologist or radiologist as being integrated into the
> > >> ongoing discussion and diagnostic process.
> > >>
> > >> Communication is essential to safe patient care. As more than one
> > >> scenario can have the same imaging appearance, it is the clinical
> > >> information that allows the radiologist to form an educated opinion as
> > >> to what the significance of the finding is (and avoid the dreaded
> > >> 'cannot exclude'!)
> > >>
> > >> Rim-enhancing collection with gas bubbles in the surgical bed - an
> > >> abscess that needs to be drained, right? Not if Surgicel had been used
> > >> during the operation (a hemostatic agent that has a very similar
> > >> imaging appearance).
> > >>
> > >> Given a CT or MRI which may have numerous abnormal findings in its
> > >> hundreds/thousands of images, the diagnostic process of putting all
> > >> the findings together to form an interpretation / hypothesis about
> > >> what is going on is not really all that different from other fields in
> > >> medicine.
> > >>
> > >> Sometimes referring physicians are concerned about 'biasing' the
> > >> radiologist with clinical information, but providing less information
> > >> is unlikely to help improve accuracy - better communication will. If
> > >> anything in the report doesn't fit - pick up the phone or send an
> > >> email/fax for a second look!
> > >>
> > >> As another example, consolidation on a chest radiograph is a
> > >> nonspecific finding that very frequently represents pneumonia and is
> > >> reported as such, but if this is a chronic process (especially if the
> > >> patient has weight loss without signs of infection), it could very
> > >> well be cancer.
> > >>
> > >> Agree that providing patients access to test reports will help reduce
> > >> findings falling through the cracks. I read about patient portals on a
> > >> regular basis - how commonly are they used today?
> > >> http://meetinglibrary.asco.org/content/120470-140
> > >>
> > >> Another area for improvement is to improve the ease/frequency with
> > >> which diagnostic specialists and office-based physicians communicate
> > >> with each other (e.g. direct phone lines).
> > >>
> > >> Multidisciplinary rounds and discussions with referring physicians who
> > >> drop by the reading room are very helpful in clearing up diagnostic
> > >> conundrums - however, this mostly happens in the hospital setting.
> > >>
> > >> (cannot tell from Dr. Elias' post if he conveyed his concerns about
> > >> the reports to the hospital or spoke with the radiologist directly - I
> > >> hope improving communication would be a goal of all involved in
> > >> patient care, for many obvious reasons)
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On 24 January 2016 at 16:55, robert bell
> > >> <0000000296e45ec4-dmarc-request at list.improvediagnosis.org> wrote:
> > >>> I have suggested that at the same time, or even before we tackle
> Errors in
> > >>> Diagnosis, we see that all our support diagnostic tests (Lab, X-ray,
> etc.)
> > >>> are in good order so as to help make the correct diagnoses more
> often.
> > >>
> > >> To unsubscribe from the IMPROVEDX:
> > >> mail to:IMPROVEDX-SIGNOFF-REQUEST at LIST.IMPROVEDIAGNOSIS.ORG
> > >> or click the following link: IMPROVEDX at LIST.IMPROVEDIAGNOSIS.ORG
> > >>
> > >> Address messages to: IMPROVEDX at LIST.IMPROVEDIAGNOSIS.ORG
> > >>
> > >> For additional information and subscription commands, visit:
> > >> http://www.lsoft.com/resources/faq.asp#4A
> > >>
> > >> http://LIST.IMPROVEDIAGNOSIS.ORG/ (with your password)
> > >>
> > >> Visit the searchable archives or adjust your subscription at:
> > >> http://list.improvediagnosis.org/scripts/wa-IMPDIAG.exe?INDEX
> > >>
> > >> Moderator: David Meyers, Board Member, Society to Improve 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>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Moderator: David Meyers, Board Member, Society to Improve 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>
> > ***************
> > CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail, including any attachments, is for
> the sole use of the intended recipient and may contain confidential and
> privileged information. If you are not an intended recipient, or the person
> responsible for delivering this message to an intended recipient, you are
> hereby notified that reading, copying, using or distributing this message
> is prohibited. If you are not an intended recipient, please contact the
> sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message from
> your computer system.
> > ***************
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Moderator: David Meyers, Board Member, Society to Improve 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
>
>
>
> Moderator:David Meyers, Board Member, 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
>
>
>
> Moderator:David Meyers, Board Member, 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
>
>
>
> Moderator:David Meyers, Board Member, 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
>
>
>
> Moderator:David Meyers, Board Member, Society for Improving Diagnosis in
> Medicine
>
> To learn more about SIDM visit:
> http://www.improvediagnosis.org/
>
> The information in this e-mail is intended only for the person to whom it
> is
> addressed. If you believe this e-mail was sent to you in error and the
> e-mail
> contains patient information, please contact the Partners Compliance
> HelpLine at
> http://www.partners.org/complianceline . If the e-mail was sent to you in
> error
> but does not contain patient information, please contact the sender and
> properly
> dispose of the e-mail.
>
> ------------------------------
>
>
> 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
>
> Moderator:David Meyers, Board Member, Society for Improving Diagnosis in
> Medicine
>
> To learn more about SIDM visit:
> http://www.improvediagnosis.org/
>






Moderator: David Meyers, Board Member, Society to Improve Diagnosis in Medicine


HTML Version:
URL: <../attachments/20160126/b268c0f7/attachment.html>


More information about the Test mailing list