
There has been a considerable reduction in the frequency of autopsies over the past few decades. We wanted to investigate whether doctors consider this a proper and natural development, or whether they consider that autopsies should be given a higher priority, and in such case, how.Resources, organisation and opinions on autopsy practice were registered using a questionnaire sent to all pathology departments at Norwegian hospitals, and to all doctors in the clinical departments of Haukeland University Hospital in Bergen, Norway.392 clinicians replied (percentage of replies 50.3 %). Of these, 82 % considered autopsies to be a good means of quality assurance and quality control of the clinical work. 83 % considered that more autopsies should be performed on a national basis, and 65 % considered autopsies to be just as important today as previously, in spite of technological advances in medicine. However, 80 % of the clinicians attended autopsy demonstrations less than twice a year. The waiting time for autopsy reports was long - 66 days, on average. A majority of clinicians considered that reducing this time would lead to more autopsies being ordered.Hospital doctors still consider autopsy to be a good means to assure the quality of clinical work. A reduction in the time needed to complete an autopsy report and better communication between clinicians and pathologists should be given priority.
Quality Assurance, Health Care, Attitude of Health Personnel, Hospitalists, Norway, Surveys and Questionnaires, Humans, Interdisciplinary Communication, Autopsy, Pathology Department, Hospital, Practice Patterns, Physicians'
Quality Assurance, Health Care, Attitude of Health Personnel, Hospitalists, Norway, Surveys and Questionnaires, Humans, Interdisciplinary Communication, Autopsy, Pathology Department, Hospital, Practice Patterns, Physicians'
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 7 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
