Trevor Gray wrote:
> am I just being old-fashioned in
> thinking that there should not be open access to pathology tests
> ?
Yes you are being old-fashioned. The patient's results should be
given to the patient. The Sally Clark appeal shows one of the
reasons for this. An important pathology report on one of her
children was concealed from the defence. As a result she was
jailed.
As the consultation document says we are working for the needs of
the patients. They are our employers and we should not be
suspected of concealing facts about their health from them.
Standardisation
Standardisation of test panels in the US has been applied for many
years. Compliance is enforced because the government and
insurance companies will not reimburse labs for non-standard
panels. This results in a lot of bureaucratic nonsense but does help
to ensure uniformity.
One real problem is that the panels are often changed and then
after protests changed back again,
If our standards are set by professional organisations not penny -
pinching government paymasters surely standardisation will be an
advantage to all.
Mike CollinsMike Collins MLSO3
Clinical Biochemistry & Immunology
[log in to unmask]
[log in to unmask]
2915
http://www.leedsteachinghospitals.com
------ACB discussion List Information--------
This is an open discussion list for the academic and clinical
community working in clinical biochemistry.
Please note, archived messages are public and can be viewed
via the internet. Views expressed are those of the individual and
they are responsible for all message content.
ACB Web Site
http://www.acb.org.uk
List Archives
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/ACB-CLIN-CHEM-GEN.html
List Instructions (How to leave etc.)
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/
|