In practicing anatomic pathology, the pathology report is a reflection of the pathologist’s competence, based on the precision and accuracy involved in finalizing it. Although designing comprehensive quality system policies and procedures at the department level would appear to be the logical approach in the right direction, precision & accuracy may not be easy to achieve due to various factors. While there can be no doubt that the data provided by practitioners of anatomic pathology is highly relevant and valuable to the practice of evidence based medicine in the clinical arena one would do well to keep in mind that the knowledge base in this speciality is predominantly observational; which can create a butterfly effect in clinical outcome. Clinical practitioners play an essential role in error reduction through several avenues such as effective test ordering, providing accurate and pertinent clinical information, procuring high-quality specimens, providing timely follow-up on test results, effectively communicating on potentially discrepant diagnoses, and advocating second opinions on the pathology diagnosis in specific situations. This is indeed the right time to consider a re-look into the functioning of our anatomic pathology departments; Multidisciplinary approach is ideal way forward in analyzing our final Diagnosis.

Partial Contents: Designing a Quality Improvement Plan; Regulatory Compliance; Strategies for Error Reduction and Prevention in Surgical Pathology; Defining and Handling Errors; Quality Improvement Plan Components and Monitors; Quality Management in Histology, Immunohistochemistry, Cytology, and Autopsy Pathology.

The majority of studies on the quality of oncologic pathology diagnoses have focused on patient safety and have documented a variety of causes of errors that occur in the clinical and anatomic pathology department testing phases. Clinical practitioners play an essential role in error reduction through several avenues such as effective test ordering, providing accurate and pertinent clinical information, procuring high-quality specimens, providing timely follow-up on test results, effectively communicating on potentially discrepant diagnoses, and advocating second opinions on the pathology diagnosis in specific situations. This is indeed the right time to consider a re-look into the functioning of our anatomic pathology departments, especially in light of litigation threats looming large over today's medical practice. Although designing comprehensive quality system policies and procedures at the department level would appear to be the logical approach in the right direction, precision & accuracy may not be easy to achieve due to various factors. An interdisciplinary approach would be mandatory to formulate effective treatment plans to resolve the pressing problems in medical science, particularly cancer management.