BACKGROUND: Virtual microscopy is increasingly being used in dermatopathology educational settings. OBJECTIVE: The objective is to evaluate diagnostic accuracy and attitudes between virtual microscopy and traditional glass slide microscopy among dermatology residents. METHODS: A 48-question dermatopathology examination was administered to 35 dermatology residents at three different dermatology residency training sites during the 2011-2012 academic year with half (n = 24) of the questions using the gold standard of glass slide microscopy and half (n = 24) using whole, scanned virtual slides. Correct number of questions using glass slides and virtual slides was evaluated. Participants were surveyed regarding previous experience with digital slide imaging; quality, ease of use, and speed of slide review; and overall microscopy preferences. RESULTS: Overall, diagnostic accuracy was better with glass slides than virtual slides (p = 0.01). However, no statistically significant difference was found in diagnostic accuracy of first-year trainees (p > 0.99) or trainees with exposure to virtual microscopy greater than two times per month (p = 0.27). There was no overall personal preference for glass slide vs. virtual microscopy. LIMITATIONS: Different cases and questions were used for glass slides and virtual microscopy. CONCLUSIONS: Diagnostic accuracy with virtual microscopy is dependent on year of residency training and prior experience with virtual microscopy.
BACKGROUND: Virtual microscopy is increasingly being used in dermatopathology educational settings. OBJECTIVE: The objective is to evaluate diagnostic accuracy and attitudes between virtual microscopy and traditional glass slide microscopy among dermatology residents. METHODS: A 48-question dermatopathology examination was administered to 35 dermatology residents at three different dermatology residency training sites during the 2011-2012 academic year with half (n = 24) of the questions using the gold standard of glass slide microscopy and half (n = 24) using whole, scanned virtual slides. Correct number of questions using glass slides and virtual slides was evaluated. Participants were surveyed regarding previous experience with digital slide imaging; quality, ease of use, and speed of slide review; and overall microscopy preferences. RESULTS: Overall, diagnostic accuracy was better with glass slides than virtual slides (p = 0.01). However, no statistically significant difference was found in diagnostic accuracy of first-year trainees (p > 0.99) or trainees with exposure to virtual microscopy greater than two times per month (p = 0.27). There was no overall personal preference for glass slide vs. virtual microscopy. LIMITATIONS: Different cases and questions were used for glass slides and virtual microscopy. CONCLUSIONS: Diagnostic accuracy with virtual microscopy is dependent on year of residency training and prior experience with virtual microscopy.
Authors: Ryan Gertz; B Jack Longley; Daniel Bennett; Erik Ranheim; Victoria Rajamanickam; Tisha Kawahara; Justin Endo Journal: J Cutan Pathol Date: 2015-05-20 Impact factor: 1.587
Authors: Maurice B Loughrey; Paul J Kelly; Oisin P Houghton; Helen G Coleman; Joseph P Houghton; Anne Carson; Manuel Salto-Tellez; Peter W Hamilton Journal: Virchows Arch Date: 2015-05-16 Impact factor: 4.064
Authors: Marios A Gavrielides; Catherine Conway; Neil O'Flaherty; Brandon D Gallas; Stephen M Hewitt Journal: Anal Cell Pathol (Amst) Date: 2014-11-11 Impact factor: 2.916
Authors: Nikki S Vyas; Michael Markow; Carlos Prieto-Granada; Sudeep Gaudi; Leslie Turner; Paul Rodriguez-Waitkus; Jane L Messina; Drazen M Jukic Journal: J Pathol Inform Date: 2016-07-26