-
American Journal of Clinical Pathology Jan 2021
Topics: Humans; Minority Groups; Pathologists
PubMed: 33106844
DOI: 10.1093/ajcp/aqaa192 -
American Journal of Clinical Pathology Apr 2021Quantifying pathologist participation in Medicare services may be informative for the prediction of future workforce needs and reimbursement.
OBJECTIVES
Quantifying pathologist participation in Medicare services may be informative for the prediction of future workforce needs and reimbursement.
METHODS
A retrospective examination was performed of pathologist professional (Part B) Medicare billings and payments from 2012 to 2017. The Medicare Provider Utilization and Payment Data: Physician and Other Supplier Public Use File was the primary data source.
RESULTS
From 2012 to 2017, there was an increase (3.7%; 11,215 up to 11,627) in pathologists providing Medicare Part B services. Female pathologists increased from 36.10% to 40.8% of pathologists during this time period. Normalized per pathologist, there was an increase (7.8%; 1,382 up to 1,489) in beneficiaries served as well as an increase (4.1%; 2,442 up to 2,543) in services performed. The top 10 pathology Part B services performed in a facility were all surgical pathology. Although services increased, the overall payment of Part B pathology services decreased (3%; $996,519,358 down to $966,615,856) during the study period.
CONCLUSIONS
Although there is increasing pathologist participation in Medicare, the workload per pathologist has increased.
Topics: Aged; Female; Humans; Medicare; Pathologists; Retrospective Studies; Sex Factors; United States; Workforce
PubMed: 33210114
DOI: 10.1093/ajcp/aqaa167 -
Archives of Pathology & Laboratory... Apr 2020
Topics: Career Choice; Career Mobility; Humans; Pathologists; Pathology, Clinical
PubMed: 31971465
DOI: 10.5858/arpa.2019-0680-ED -
Pathology Mar 2024Biomarkers are central to the delivery of personalised/precision medicine and are increasingly used across all areas of medicine to improve diagnostic accuracy,... (Review)
Review
Biomarkers are central to the delivery of personalised/precision medicine and are increasingly used across all areas of medicine to improve diagnostic accuracy, determine prognosis and predict response to treatment. Biomarkers can be used to develop assays that are then further developed into diagnostic tests, or in vitro diagnostic devices, which require an exhaustive validation and approval process. Pathologists play a critical role in the ordering and interpretation of biomarker assays. However, the evolution of a new biomarker from discovery to clinical implementation is complex, subject to various levels of scientific, clinical and regulatory scrutiny, with an approval process that varies significantly between jurisdictions. Therefore, it is important that pathologists have a solid understanding of how biomarkers are developed, the process of biomarker validation, how new biomarkers are approved for clinical use and the potential issues around implementation of biomarker testing that may lead to inaccurate results. This paper aims to provide an overview of the process of biomarker development, approval and validation, and practical tips for anatomical pathologists involved in the testing of biomarkers in routine practice.
Topics: Humans; Pathologists; Biomarkers; Prognosis; Immunotherapy; Precision Medicine; Biomarkers, Tumor
PubMed: 38195376
DOI: 10.1016/j.pathol.2023.11.002 -
Revista Espanola de Patologia :... 2022
Topics: Humans; Pathologists; Research
PubMed: 35483771
DOI: 10.1016/j.patol.2022.03.001 -
Histopathology Jun 2023Mast cells are residents of the tubular gastrointestinal (GI) tract, where they play an important role in host defence and other vital functions. Dysregulation of mast... (Review)
Review
Mast cells are residents of the tubular gastrointestinal (GI) tract, where they play an important role in host defence and other vital functions. Dysregulation of mast cells has been implicated in the pathogenesis of several neoplastic, inflammatory, and functional disorders, some of which may manifest with GI symptoms. Surgical pathologists must therefore confront when and how to evaluate GI biopsies for mast cells, and whether such decisions should be based on morphologic criteria, clinical context, or direct request from clinical colleagues. The pathologist's role in evaluation of mast cell infiltrates is best defined in the diagnosis of systemic mastocytosis, where the utility of morphologic assessment coupled with ancillary studies is well established. In contrast, in nonneoplastic mast cell disorders such as mast cell activation syndrome, irritable bowel syndrome, or so-called 'mastocytic enterocolitis', a role for histopathology, if any, is controversial. Despite this, pathologists have seen a sharp increase in requests for mast cell quantification in the latter setting, despite these requests not being supported by published evidence. Moreover, what constitutes a 'normal' number of mast cells in a luminal GI biopsy is not well established. As a result, there is considerable variation in how these requests are handled in practice. This review evaluates and summarizes the published evidence relating to mast cell evaluation in endoscopic GI biopsies in various clinical scenarios, with a goal of providing practical, evidence-based guidance for the surgical pathologist when approached with requests for mast cell quantification in GI biopsies.
Topics: Humans; Mast Cells; Pathologists; Gastrointestinal Tract; Mastocytosis; Biopsy
PubMed: 36849791
DOI: 10.1111/his.14897 -
Language, Speech, and Hearing Services... Jul 2022The purpose of this study was to examine speech-language pathologists' (SLPs) opinions on their scope of practice related to reading, self-reported background training,...
PURPOSE
The purpose of this study was to examine speech-language pathologists' (SLPs) opinions on their scope of practice related to reading, self-reported background training, current caseloads, and confidence in their abilities to define, assess, and provide effective treatment for reading-related difficulties.
METHOD
SLPs ( = 271) from across the United States completed an online survey assessing their opinions on scope of practice, education and training in reading, and confidence in defining, assessing, and treating reading-related difficulties.
RESULTS
A majority of respondents agreed that the identification, assessment, prevention, and intervention of reading disabilities are all within the scope of practice of SLPs. However, a majority also reported that literacy instruction is more heavily the responsibility of teachers than SLPs, and approximately half felt similarly regarding prevention, assessment, identification, and intervention of reading disabilities. Many respondents did not feel that their training in reading was adequate and felt that more graduate coursework should be dedicated to literacy. There was a lot of variability in responses when asked how often respondents focus on reading skills with clients, ranging from almost daily to never; however, results indicate that SLPs rarely administer reading assessments. Overall, respondents were more confident in their ability to define versus assess or provide therapy for various reading subskills.
CONCLUSION
Despite SLPs agreeing that reading is within their scope of practice and feeling confident in some aspects of reading, graduate programs for speech-language pathology may need to provide greater training in literacy, especially related to reading assessment and diagnosis.
Topics: Communication Disorders; Deafness; Humans; Pathologists; Reading; Scope of Practice; Speech; United States
PubMed: 35486545
DOI: 10.1044/2022_LSHSS-21-00135 -
Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Oct 2019
Topics: Biopsy; Digestive System Surgical Procedures; Humans; Liver; Pathologists
PubMed: 31540643
DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2019.05.005 -
Revista de Gastroenterologia de Mexico... 2022
Topics: Crohn Disease; Diagnosis, Differential; Enteritis; Humans; Pathologists; Tuberculosis, Gastrointestinal
PubMed: 35778345
DOI: 10.1016/j.rgmxen.2022.03.010 -
American Journal of Transplantation :... Aug 2020
Topics: Biopsy; Graft Rejection; Humans; Liver Transplantation; Pathologists; Transplants
PubMed: 32239633
DOI: 10.1111/ajt.15887