Share This Page

Washington Hospital reviews Pap tests

| Saturday, Nov. 17, 2012, 6:01 p.m.

Federal inspectors completed a surprise review at Washington Hospital last week as a result of a lawsuit from a woman who claimed her Pap tests were misread for five years before she was diagnosed with cervical cancer.

Jennifer Beiswenger, 30, of Canonsburg is in remission after being treated with radiation and chemotherapy for an advanced stage of the disease.

In her lawsuit filed in the Washington County Common Pleas Court, Beiswenger said Pap tests conducted between 2006 and 2010 were misread because they had found abnormal cells. She and her husband are suing the hospital and eight of its doctors.

“I'm worried that every woman in Washington County that went through that hospital could have a problem, said Beiswenger's attorney, Deborah Maliver.

Hospital officials said they take the allegations very seriously.

“Immediately upon learning of this complaint, the hospital consulted with independent experts to evaluate the claims at issue, and is working diligently to identify any patient safety concerns,” a prepared statement said.

The American Society for Cytotechnology, which conducted the review, has 10 days to submit a written report to the hospital. The hospital then has 10 days to send a corrective action plan to the federal Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, said Lorraine Ryan, a spokeswoman for the agency.

Luis Fábregas is a staff writerfor Trib Total Media. He canbe reached at 412-320-7998or lfabregas@tribweb.com.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.