Evaluation of Turnaround Times of Diagnostic Biopsies: A Metric of Quality in Surgical Pathology

Abstract

Introduction. Timely and accurate diagnosis of diseases is crucial for effective patient care. Turnaround time (TAT) in surgical pathology, defined as the time between accessioning the sample and reporting results, is a key performance indicator reflecting quality and efficiency. This study explores factors affecting TAT for diagnostic biopsies in a tertiary oncology hospital. Methods. A 1-month pilot study was conducted, focusing on 695 in-house diagnostic biopsies. Biopsies were categorized as routine (requiring only hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) staining) or complex cases (requiring additional tests). TAT was defined as the time between sample accessioning and report availability in the electronic medical record, with delays defined as exceeding 3 days for routine cases and 4 days for complex cases. Survival analysis using Kaplan-Meier plots was utilized to analyze TAT. Results. The overall mean TAT was 3.7 ± 2 days, with routine cases at 3.1 ± 2 days and complex cases at 4.8 ± 2 days (P < 0.001). Survival analysis revealed prolonged TAT for complex cases. Organ-specific analysis highlighted variations in TAT, with brain biopsies presenting the highest complexity and longest TAT. Surprisingly, malignant cases demonstrated slightly shorter TATs compared to benign cases (P = 0.026). Delays were observed in 34% of all cases. Conclusions. Laboratory TAT is crucial and is frequently used as a performance benchmark. We analyzed the various causes of delayed TAT in our hospital's histopathology department, with an emphasis on variables in the analytical phase. The results of this study demonstrate that cases involving ancillary techniques had significantly longer TATs compared to routine H&E cases.

Keywords

turnaround time surgical pathology diagnostic biopsies oncology diagnosis immunohistochemistry

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Hawkins

. Laboratory turnaround time. Clin Biochem Rev. 2007;28(4):179-194.

Steindel

Howanitz

. Physician satisfaction and emergency department laboratory test turnaround time. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2001;125(7):863-871. doi:https://doi.org/10.5858/2001-125-0863-PSAEDL

Steindel

Novis

. Using outlier events to monitor test turnaround time. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 1999;123(7):607-614. doi:https://doi.org/10.5858/1999-123-0607-UOETMT

Patel

Smith

Kurbatova

Guarner

. Factors that impact turnaround time of surgical pathology specimens in an academic institution. Hum Pathol. 2012;43(9):1501-1505. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.humpath.2011.11.010

Lundberg

. Acting on significant laboratory results. JAMA. 1981;245(17):1762. doi:https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.1981.03310420052033

Vollmer

. Analysis of turnaround times in pathology. Am J Clin Pathol. 2006;126(2):215-220. doi:https://doi.org/10.1309/YTEKD0CNUBKJVFTW

Kishore

Goel

Khanna

. Understanding survival analysis: Kaplan-Meier estimate. Int J Ayurveda Res. 2010;1(4):274. doi:https://doi.org/10.4103/0974-7788.76794

Tsai

Tintu

Demirtas

Boucherie

de Jonge

de Rijke

. A critical review of laboratory performance indicators. Crit Rev Clin Lab Sci. 2019;56(7):458-471. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/10408363.2019.1641789

Raab

Grzybicki

Janosky

, et al. Clinical impact and frequency of anatomic pathology errors in cancer diagnoses. Cancer. 2005;104(10):2205-2213. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.21431

10.

Morelli

Porazzi

Ruspini

Restelli

Banfi

. Analysis of errors in histology by root cause analysis: a pilot study. J Prev Med Hyg. 2013;54(2):90-96.

11.

Santana

De Lima Ferreira

. Errors in surgical pathology laboratory. In: InTech eBooks [Internet]. 2018. Available from: https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.72919

12.

Volmar

Idowu

Souers

Karcher

Nakhleh

. Turnaround time for large or complex specimens in surgical pathology: a college of American pathologists Q-probes study of 56 institutions. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2015;139(2):171-177. doi:https://doi.org/10.5858/arpa.2013-0671-CP

13.

Nakhleh

Gephardt

Zarbo

. Necessity of clinical information in surgical pathology: a college of American pathologists Q-probes study of 771 475 surgical pathology cases from 341 institutions. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 1999;123(7):615-619. doi:https://doi.org/10.5858/1999-123-0615-NOCIIS

14.

Dias

Barrett

. Comparison of histopathological turnaround times for mandibulectomies, glossectomies, and incisional biopsies of the tongue. Br J Oral Maxillofacial Surg. 2023;61(2):131-135. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjoms.2022.11.005

15.

Ribé

Ribalta

Lledó

Torras

Asenjo

Cardesa

. Evaluation of turnaround times as a component of quality assurance in surgical pathology. Int J Qual Health Care. 1998;10(3):241-245. doi:https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/10.3.241

16.

Brown

. Improving histopathology turnaround time: a process management approach. Curr Diagnostic Pathol. 2004;10(6):444-452. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cdip.2004.07.008

17.

Ramsay

. Errors in histopathology reporting: detection and avoidance. Histopathology. 1999;34(6):481-490. doi:https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2559.1999.00719.x

18.

Alshieban

Al-Surimi

. Reducing turnaround time of surgical pathology reports in pathology and laboratory medicine departments. BMJ Qual Improv Rep. 2015;4(1):u209223.w3773. doi:https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjquality.u209223.w3773

19.

Zarbo

Nakhleh

Walsh

. Customer satisfaction in anatomic pathology: a college of American pathologists Q-probes study of 3065 physician surveys from 94 laboratories. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2003;127(1):23-29. doi:https://doi.org/10.5858/2003-127-23-CSIA