Know error

[WEBB PINKERTON]

What are people's opinions about Know Error?

http://knowerror.com/

Is it useful or another waste of money?

I have worked at some crappy labs that mixed up specimens from time to time. Sweatshops, so there was constant staff turnover and the labs had been "Six-sigma'd" to death so people were overworked. I can only imagine things are going to get worse thanks to reimbursement cuts.


Sounds like the reps on cafepharma lean toward waste.

http://www.cafepharma.com/boards/showthread.php?t=493649

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[lipomas]

It's a way for groups to make extra money. It doesn't provide anything useful IMHO. The chances of having a mis-identified specimen are pretty low if you use proper labeling and specimen handling. I would say the chances of having this test be wrong because one of the specimens was mislabeled or mishandled is probably just as high. So you could have the "correct" biopsy incorrectly identified as not belonging to the patient.

I would posit that simply using this test frequently is a huge red flag for a lab.

 

[pathstudent]

If they wanted to really game the system they should be marketing direct to patients. Take out commercials scarring people that their breast, pap smear, colon biopsy, and prostate biopsy might be switched with someone else's. Make patients demand it upfront.

 

[lipomas]

They kind of do. They market to patients via urologists, make it seem like they are getting terrible care if their doctor doesn't use this.

 

[Doormat]

I believe urology offices should also perform "know error" DNA fingerprint testing to verify that all the CBC and PSA results from their patients, run in their in-office clincal laboratory, are truly those obtained from the patient.

Douchebags.

 

[pathstudent]

They kind of do. They market to patients via urologists, make it seem like they are getting terrible care if their doctor doesn't use this.

I was thinking more like commercials on the view and Oprah for women and Espn for men. Show a commercial of an unkempt geeky looking community pathologist nodding off at the microscope with a narrator saying "would you trust your cancer diagnosis to this man. Know error recommends you get an expert subspecialtized consult with DNA verification that your biopsy belongs to you. We will also test it for every known gene mutation and study to look for what makes your cancer unique, because cancer is personal".

 

[KLPM]

would you trust your cancer diagnosis to this man.

This man?

 

[LADoc00]

Know error is a scam type start up built on creating a marketplace and then selling out to a larger testing business.

I have had hospital security escort them out places I have been. Do not entertain their hijinks.

You have been warned.

 

[WEBB PINKERTON]

Interesting lawsuit that someone forwarded onto me about DNA testing done on a supposedly mixed up case. Shows the lengths people will go to get money and how subjective our work is. Hell, they tried to raise reasonable doubt about the validity of the DNA testing itself.

http://www.rissman.com/site/themes/rissman/assets/rtr/d0d2d860e720201a76bf6a8218956616.pdf

Of course CAP probably believes that the specimens should have been sent to some hyperspecialized pathologists to begin with. Community pathologists should be extinct in their eyes. No role for them anymore. The hyperspecialized NEVER make any mistakes.

 

[LADoc00]

Holy crap I read that entire case through, that is TERRIFYING. And I would agree it is not necessarily an uncommon occurrence. I myself have caught these case mid stream (prior to surgery) and ordered DNA testing to identify a mix up.

Lesson: Keep in close contact with your clinicians. Ask questions. Trust your gut. Be suspicious. And above all: Trust No One.

 

[WEBB PINKERTON]

One "expert" witness tried to blame the histotech for not wiping down the forceps at the embedding station. Of course the lab takes all the blame. Who knows? Maybe the endoscopy center played a role in the contamination. I wonder if they investigated that at all or did they just look at the lab's procedures and throw out there the idea that the forceps were likely dirty? Did they investigate the endoscopy centers procedures? If not, they should have.

It's always smart to question when different types of specimens don't correlate. Of course in this case, the lab that got sued believed the smears also showed malignancy. So that is why the pathologist didn't question whether or not the cells on the cell block slides were contaminant. The special stains didn't support a gastric primary either. There were some red flags that would have made me suspicious and investigate.

We have bronchs occationally that get NOTHING on the rapid on site assessment smears but they send us additional aspirates in formalin that are made into blocks which show cancer sometimes. Hope no floaters come back to bite my a** someday.

I am surprised that none of the consulting pathologists made a distinction between what they saw on the smears and cell block. The case was reviewed TWICE prior to surgery and neither institution made the distinction between what they saw on block vs smears. I've always believed that you should report what you see on all the specimens (smears, cell block, monolayer). One billing person told me to do that years ago.

 

[pathstudent]

Fascinating. I wonder if the msk pathologists re-amended their reports.

 

[2121115]

I've always believed that you should report what you see on all the specimens (smears, cell block, monolayer). One billing person told me to do that years ago.

Yep. Separate them out in the report. Better that way for a lot of reasons.