Leveraging thoughtful quality metric selection for individual and system improvements: the atypical category and use of dashboards

J Am Soc Cytopathol. 2023 Jan-Feb;12(1):3-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jasc.2022.10.002. Epub 2022 Oct 7.

Abstract

Quality management is integral to the practice of cytopathology, especially given the heavily manual workflows and expanding ancillary testing requirements inherent to the cytopathology laboratory. Monitoring quality data like turnaround time, specimen unsatisfactory rates, and diagnostic category utilization rates allows for better understanding of performance with opportunities for targeted improvement if there are variations from that which is expected. However, there are costs to quality monitoring including the time and resources needed, and, in already taxed systems, quality management risks being viewed as just another box to check. While there are mandated quality metrics that must be collected by cytology laboratories, thoughtful selection of key performance indicators can be of tremendous benefit in helping to better understand complex laboratory processes and directing improvement endeavors where needed. The following short communication is a discussion on quality management in the cytopathology laboratory from 3 Cytopathology Quality Management Directors. The discussion focuses on monitoring the atypical reporting category with an emphasis on how trending and visualizing quality metrics can provide laboratories with key data.

Keywords: Atypia of undetermined significance; Cytology; Dashboard; Laboratory management; Quality assurance; Quality improvement.

MeSH terms

  • Benchmarking
  • Cytodiagnosis*
  • Data Accuracy
  • Humans
  • Laboratories*