Kale Sachin, Bindu Suparna, Agrawal Ranjan
Department of Pathology, MGM Medical College, Aurangabad, Maharashtra, India.
Department of Pathology, Rajshree Medical Research Institute, Bareilly, Uttar Pradesh, India.
Indian J Pathol Microbiol. 2023 Jan-Mar;66(1):118-128. doi: 10.4103/ijpm.ijpm_237_22.
Pathology is a broad subject consisting of various branches, such as hematology, clinical pathology, biochemistry, histopathology, cytology, blood banking, and others. All the subspecialties are difficult to cover in depth in a 3-year MD Pathology course and curriculum. Hence, it was decided to investigate whether the MD Pathology curriculum is able to meet the challenges of today's laboratory medicine practice. So, a survey was conducted among newly qualified pathologists who have passed their exam within last 5 years. Purpose was to know their views about MD Pathology curriculum with special emphasis on challenges they face during their day-to-day practice.
Study is designed as cross-sectional survey conducted via web-based Google forms questionnaire. Study population is pathologists qualified within last 5 years. A convenience sample of eligible pathologists was taken by sending a web-based Google form to various pathology groups on social media apps. Data were collected in the Google spreadsheet software and various responses were summarized as percentages, graphs, and pie-charts as necessary. Chi square test was used to find the significance of difference in responses from government, private, and deemed university respondents.
Different numbers of responses were received to different survey questions. Out of 187 respondents, 65 (34.8%) worked in a hospital-based laboratory, 61 (32.6%) did jobs in a private laboratory, 49 (26.2%) worked in a medical college, and 37 (19.8%) worked in their own private laboratories. Out of 193 respondents, 158 (81.9%) were working in hematology, 149 (77.2%) in clinical pathology, 139 (72%) in cytopathology, 118 (61.7%) in histopathology, whereas 103 (53.4%) worked in clinical biochemistry, and least number of respondents, i.e., 38 (19.7%) were working in blood bank. Almost all the respondents had overlapping work in hematology and other areas. The level of confidence rated by the respondents was best in hematology, followed by clinical pathology; it was least for clinical biochemistry and blood bank. Out of 192 respondents, 64.1% (123) felt that the curriculum does not equip them for lab management and administration, 21.9% (42) felt that the curriculum somewhat equipped them; whereas only 14.1% (27) felt that curriculum equips them for this task. There were 191 responses to the question regarding satisfaction with MD Pathology curriculum; out of which, 51.8% (99) were not satisfied, 24.6% (47) said they may be satisfied, whereas 23.6% (45) were satisfied with the curriculum. There was no significant difference in responses from government, private, and deemed university respondents.
The graduating MD Pathology students expressed confidence in reporting routine cases of hematology, clinical pathology, routine cytology, and histopathology. However, there is difficulty in clinical biochemistry, blood banking, and reporting of malignancies. The laboratory management and administration, communication skills, and quality assurance are also other areas of weakness. MD Pathology program needs more focus on these weaknesses, so that newly qualified graduate would feel confident in day-to-day laboratory working.
病理学是一门广泛的学科，由血液学、临床病理学、生物化学、组织病理学、细胞学、血库学等多个分支组成。在为期3年的医学博士病理学课程和教学计划中，很难对所有这些亚专业进行深入涵盖。因此，决定调查医学博士病理学课程是否能够应对当今检验医学实践的挑战。于是，对过去5年内通过考试的新获得资格的病理学家进行了一项调查。目的是了解他们对医学博士病理学课程的看法，特别强调他们在日常实践中面临的挑战。
本研究设计为通过基于网络的谷歌表单问卷进行的横断面调查。研究对象是过去5年内获得资格的病理学家。通过在社交媒体应用程序上向各个病理学团体发送基于网络的谷歌表单，选取了符合条件的病理学家作为便利样本。数据收集在谷歌电子表格软件中，并根据需要将各种回答总结为百分比、图表和饼图。采用卡方检验来确定政府、私立和被视为大学的受访者回答差异的显著性。
不同的调查问卷问题收到了不同数量的回答。在187名受访者中，65人（34.8%）在医院实验室工作，61人（32.6%）在私立实验室工作，49人（26.2%）在医学院工作，37人（19.8%）在自己的私立实验室工作。在193名受访者中，158人（81.9%）从事血液学工作，149人（77.2%）从事临床病理学工作，139人（72%）从事细胞病理学工作，118人（61.7%）从事组织病理学工作，而103人（53.4%）从事临床生物化学工作，从事血库工作的受访者最少，即38人（19.7%）。几乎所有受访者在血液学和其他领域都有重叠工作。受访者评定的信心水平在血液学方面最佳，其次是临床病理学；临床生物化学和血库方面最低。在192名受访者中，64.1%（123人）认为课程没有使他们具备实验室管理和行政能力，21.9%（42人）认为课程在一定程度上使他们具备了这种能力；而只有14.1%（27人）认为课程使他们具备了这项任务的能力。关于对医学博士病理学课程满意度的问题有191个回答；其中，51.8%（99人）不满意，24.6%（47人）表示可能满意，而23.6%（45人）对课程满意。政府、私立和被视为大学的受访者的回答没有显著差异。
即将毕业的医学博士病理学学生对报告血液学、临床病理学、常规细胞学和组织病理学的常规病例表示有信心。然而，临床生物化学、血库学以及恶性肿瘤报告方面存在困难。实验室管理和行政、沟通技巧以及质量保证也是其他薄弱环节。医学博士病理学课程需要更多地关注这些薄弱环节，以便新获得资格的毕业生在日常实验室工作中感到自信。
