Thinking Outside of the Box

I know the electronic medical records get a lot of flack. Some of it is well-deserved. But as a pathologist who started training in a void, the EMR has been an invaluable addition to my practice. Traditionally, we pathologists work inside a black box. We rarely venture out of our lab closet caves - god forbid going to the floor to wade around in the muck of the paper chart. We all have computers next to our scopes, and gaining access to our patients in this manner - radiology, clinic notes, etc., makes the glass slide with a two dimensional slice of Easter egg dyed tissue spring to life.

Some clinicians are better than others. Surgeons and radiologists are notoriously brief, with rare exceptions. There is a certain infectious disease specialist at my hospital that writes so voluminously and well that I feel like I am sitting at the bedside of the patient I am puzzling over. There is a big difference in the large hospital I am primarily based at versus the small town hospital I rotate at once a month. In the smaller town, clinic notes are piped into the hospital medical records (must be easier there to do this I guess - less clinics, less complication) so I can access outpatient records - the clinician's thoughts can illuminate a tough GI biopsy and make it so much easier. It saves me lots of headaches and phone calls.

Performing wet reads on CT-guided needle biopsies in radiology is a particular sore spot. I know the radiologists are busy - drain an abscess here, do a paracentesis there, squeeze in another needle between a couple of radiofrequency ablations. But I still get irked when called to a lung biopsy and the radiologist doesn't know the history. I know, I know, I don't have to worry about causing a pneumothorax and putting in an emergent chest tube or dealing with a pulmonary hemorrhage - and they do. We all have our places in the cog of the medicine wheel. Thankfully, with EMR, I don't have to worry about what the clinician did or did not communicate to the radiologist - I can just open up the computer and get all the information I need to know. Information aids diagnostic accuracy, and ability to triage the specimen appropriately.

Take for instance the other day. I was sitting in my new (beautiful - yes still a closet in a lab, but with brand new coppery Formica and linoleum hardwoods that render me the envy of all the other pathologists) office and grabbed a CSF (cerebrospinal fluid) case. The cytotech screened it and called it negative. 90-95% of the time they are right. I picked up the cytospin, threw it on the stage, and looked in the scope. Low cellularity -appropriate for a CSF - a few lymphocytes and monocytes. But wait, what was that? A plasma cell? Plasma cells are never normal in the CSF. Often they herald chronic inflammatory issues or viral illnesses. I opened the EMR on the patient.

This patient had a diagnosis of plasma cell myeloma with recent acute mental status changes. So the lone plasma cell or two I was seeing, among the lymphs and monos, could indicate leptomeningeal spread of the patient's disease process. I reversed the tech diagnosis to atypical and added a lengthy comment - unfortunately there weren't enough cells to attempt flow cytometry to assess for clonality of the plasma cells to cinch the diagnosis. But with the information in the EMR I was able to get a more holistic picture on a couple of cells and provide better care for the patient. I cringe to wonder if I might have blown them off as lymphs without my crutch.

I open the EMR every day, all day, on almost every patient. In the rare instance that I see cancer in a specimen where there is no clinical or radiographic suspicion, I can take extra measures to ensure that I have the correct specimen and gain additional consults to firm up my suspicions. I am a pathologist, but with EMR, I no longer live in a black box. And for that, I am thankful. I really don't know how my predecessors got along without it.