RE: Workload/Productivity

<< Previous Message | Next Message >>
From:"Johnson, Mickey" <JohnsoM@shmc.org>
To:'Hewlett Bryan' <HEWLETT@HHSC.CA>, histonet@pathology.swmed.edu, 'RUSS ALLISON' <Allison@Cardiff.ac.uk>
Reply-To:
Content-Type:text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1

Hewlett,
Could you give us some specific numbers for average blocks and slides and
stains per month or year?
Thanks,

Mickie

-----Original Message-----
From: Hewlett Bryan [mailto:HEWLETT@HHSC.CA]
Sent: Thursday, July 20, 2000 12:02 PM
To: histonet@pathology.swmed.edu; 'RUSS ALLISON'
Subject: RE: Workload/Productivity


Russ,

Canadian Workload measurement units are alive and well!
As you say, not perfect but effective.

Bryan

> ----------
> From: 	RUSS ALLISON[SMTP:Allison@Cardiff.ac.uk]
> Sent: 	July 20, 2000 3:18 AM
> To: 	histonet@pathology.swmed.edu
> Subject: 	RE: Workload/Productivity
> 
> Do I assume that Canadian Workload measurements are now dead 
> and buried?  Although far from perfect, it was about the best I ever 
> came accross.
> Phil Hall (if you are reading, Phil, or Phil Bullock) in Bristol, 
> England, worked out the stats ratio for "histotechs/pathologist 
> using figures from the South West of England labs.  They came up 
> with different figures for University (Teaching), large and small 
> hospitals.
> It all depended upon the Roayal of Pathologists figures of 4000 
> (mixed) specimens being the maximum workload of a fully qualified 
> histopathologist.  That figure has been criticised as arbitrary - and 
> it probably is no more than a "best guess".
> Please don't ask me for the figures (my filing system would 
> certainly let me down).  Hopefully Phil or someone else from the 
> South West will read this.
> 
> 
> Russ Allison, 
> Dental School
> Cardiff
> Wales
> 



<< Previous Message | Next Message >>