Results from the 2019 American Society of Cytopathology survey on rapid onsite evaluation (ROSE)-part 2: subjective views among the cytopathology community.

INTRODUCTION

This study aims to improve understanding of the cytopathology community's perspective regarding the value of rapid onsite evaluation (ROSE) in clinical practice.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The American Society of Cytopathology membership was surveyed in 2019 to obtain subjective data on the cytopathology community's perceptions regarding ROSE. Comments were categorized by major themes and attitudes and analyzed by respondent's role in laboratory, practice size, and practice setting (Fisher's exact and χ tests).

RESULTS

A total of 541 responses were received from 255 cytopathologists/pathologists, 261 cytotechnologists, 19 trainees, and 6 others (as previously reported). Reasons for which cytopathology personnel provide this service aligned with their perceptions of why clinicians request ROSE. A minority of respondents, disproportionally from high volume centers, felt ROSE is unnecessary. Overall attitude regarding ROSE was generally positive. There were no significant differences in attitude regarding ROSE according to role in laboratory or practice size, but respondents from academic centers provided a significantly higher percentage of positive comments than those in private or community practice. Although survey respondents generally felt that ROSE is valuable to patient care, they also highlighted several challenges, including staffing, time commitment, and inadequate reimbursement. Implementation of telecytology was felt to potentially alleviate some of these challenges.

CONCLUSIONS

Survey results show that the cytology community views ROSE favorably, practices vary considerably, and there is a perceived need for improved reimbursement. Data from this study may be used to identify areas that warrant additional research to clarify the clinical value of ROSE.