THIS MONTH’S ISSUE

Read, save, and print articles from the current issue

ARTICLES

Chronological index
2013–2017

PRODUCT GUIDES

Compare all instruments
and software systems

DEPARTMENTS

Chronological index
2013–2017

WEBINARS

Register Now and
On Demand

Home » Archive by Tags

Articles tagged with: CAP programs/products/services (see also Q-Probes and Proficiency testing) –

Dashboard eases performance analysis and prep

March 2017—Crystal Sands, MBA, MT(ASCP)SM, manager of quality, regulatory, and safety at NorDx Laboratories in Scarborough, Me., has a new favorite product, and she’s not shy about saying so. “Oh my gosh, I’ll be playing with it for a long time,” she says. “Every time I use it, I find different ways to slice and dice.”

Cytopathology + More: Glass slide programs to have latest terms, ancillary clues

August 2016—Why is there more than one correct answer for this glass slide case? I wouldn’t make the diagnosis of mesothelioma without correlating with the clinical history and performing ancillary studies. In our practice, we would call this case a follicular lesion of undetermined significance, and that isn’t an answer on the response sheet.

3 new NGS Surveys on CAP 2016 PT launchpad

November 2015—More than two years ago, when the CAP decided to move forward with proficiency testing for next-generation sequencing, the decision point was modest. “We estimated that about 35 labs would subscribe, based on survey information, and that was sufficient for us to move forward,” says Karl V. Voelkerding, MD, chair of the CAP Next-Generation Sequencing project team.

What’s new in next-gen sequencing checklist requirements

August 2015—The first CAP accreditation checklist requirements specific to next-generation sequencing were published only three years ago. “In 2012, those 18 accreditation requirements were basically all new language that the College’s Next-Generation Sequencing Project Team developed and submitted for review,” says project team chair Karl Voelkerding, MD, of the University of Utah Department of Pathology and ARUP Laboratories.

Evidence drives guideline on reducing interpretive error

July 2015—Secondary review of surgical pathology cases is a common, if not universal, practice in U.S. anatomic pathology departments. The evidence has shown that case reviews detect errors. But until now, one important thing has been missing: consensus on the actual standard of practice for such reviews. Anatomic pathology departments have lacked evidence-based guidelines on how and when to conduct reviews.

Visuals to the fore in new histology labeling guideline

June 2015—Like laboratorians, filmmakers split their workflow into three phases. In film, they are pre-production, production, and post-production. When flubs occur on a movie set, “We’ll fix it in post,” often said sardonically, is the fallback game plan to keep things on schedule and use visual and sound effects to cover up mistakes.

Upper-echelon QA through Accuracy-Based Programs

June 2015—HbA1c, creatinine, testosterone, vitamin D, lipids, and maybe albumin. If you know what the common thread is among these analytes, then you may be familiar with the CAP’s Accuracy-Based Programs and their evolution over the past couple of decades.

How satisfied are physicians with labs? Study digs deep

March 2015—In the span of human history, seven years is nothing but an eye blink. But in technological terms, seven years might as well be a geologic epoch. Consider: Only since 2007 have we seen Netflix streaming services; Kindles, Nooks, and other e-readers; and the sweeping adoption of the iPhone.

Pap test litigation—
Not backing off: CAP retains call for blinded review

March 2015—When the 11th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals issued an opinion harshly criticizing the CAP’s guidelines on review of Pap tests last summer, many in the pathology community were stunned by the rebuke and wondered whether change was called for.

Is molecular AP testing in sync with guidelines?

November 2014—Molecular testing, on a steep growth curve in anatomic pathology, is increasingly providing decisive guidance for treatment of cancer patients. But while guidelines on clinical relevance and performance of common molecular tests are available and widely used in theory, to date there has been limited information on how well requests for molecular testing in AP laboratories are adhering to the guidelines.

X