PubMed · 10114110
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
J A Sehloff. 1991. Simplify humdrum PC tasks with batch files.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10114110/
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
BACKGROUND: One important benefit of electronic health information is the improved interface between infectious diseases practice and public health. Electronic communicable disease reporting (CDR), given its legal mandate and clear public health importance, is a significant early step in the sifting and pooling of health data for purposes beyond patient care and billing. Over the next 5-10 years, almost all CDR will move to the internet. METHODS: This paper reviews the components of electronic laboratory reporting (ELR), including sifting through data in a laboratory information management system for reportable results, controlled "vocabularies" (e.g., LOINC, Logical Observation Identifiers Names and Codes [Regenstrief Institute], and SNOMED, Systematized Nomenclature of Medicine [College of American Pathologists]), the "syntax" of an electronic message (e.g., health level 7 [HL7]), the implications of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act for ELR, and the obstacles to and potential benefits of ELR. RESULTS: There are several ways that infectious diseases physicians, infection control professionals, and microbiology laboratorians will participate in electronic CDR, including web-based case reporting and ELR, the direct, automated messaging of communicable disease reports from clinical lab information management systems to the appropriate public health jurisdiction's information system. CONCLUSIONS: ELR has the potential to make a large impact on the timeliness and the completeness of communicable disease reporting, but it does not replace the clinician's responsibility to submit a case report with important demographic and epidemiologic information.
Since the mid-1990s, public health laboratories have improved tuberculosis (TB) test performance, which has contributed to the resumption of the decline in TB incidence in the United States. However, to eliminate TB in the United States, further improvements are needed in laboratory services to support TB treatment, prevention, and control. A critical step is the development of an integrated system that ensures prompt and reliable laboratory testing and flow of information among laboratorians, clinicians, and TB-control officials. Challenges to developing such a system include 1) establishing lines of communication among laboratorians, clinicians, and TB-control officials; 2) expediting reporting of laboratory results, which can avoid delayed or inappropriate treatment and missed opportunities to prevent transmission; 3) developing evidence-based recommendations for use of new laboratory technologies; 4) maintaining staff proficiency in light of declining numbers of specimens to test, workforce shortages, and loss of laboratory expertise; and 5) upgrading laboratory information systems and connecting all partners. The report of the Association of Public Health Laboratories Task Force presents a framework to improve the future of TB laboratory services and describes the role of the laboratory in TB treatment and control, Task Force processes, general principles and benchmarks, and steps for the dissemination of the Task Force recommendations. This MMWR expands on the Task Force report by describing specific actions and performance measures to guide development and implementation of an integrated system for providing TB laboratory services. CDC and the Association of Public Health Laboratories have developed these guidelines so that laboratorians, clinicians, public health officials, administrators, and funding entities can work together to ensure that health-care providers and TB-control officials have the information needed to treat TB patients, prevent TB transmission, and ultimately eliminate TB in the United States.
OBJECTIVES: To test a double histology reading system based on digitalized imaging for cancer diagnosis. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Pathology images of cancer diagnosis material were produced in real time by a digital imaging system integrated into the laboratory data processing system. Over a 30-day period, second readings were performed using the digitalized images. Cases with second readings were classified according to the aspect on the digitalized images as malignant tumor with histological type, malignant tumor with no other precision, and doubtful malignancy. RESULTS: During the study period, 204 cases of cancer were diagnosed, including 178 with digitalized imaging (87%). Among the digitalized cases, 119 (67%) were classified as malignant tumor with histological type, 53 (30%) as malignant tumor with no other precision, and 6 (3%) as doubtful malignancy. The histology material of these latter cases were reviewed and corresponded to malignant tumors. Approximately 2 hours per week were devoted to the second readings. CONCLUSION: A integrated digitalized imaging system can participate in quality control of cancer diagnosis by allowing rapid efficacious second readings.