Vladimir Volel1, Tarush Kothari1, Diane Groppi1, Claudine Alexis1, Mike Ragnauth1, Raheela Qureshi1, Amy Entin1, Amy Alexander1, Oksana Yaskiv1, James M Crawford1, Nina Kohn2, Tawfiqul Bhuiya1.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: A validated and objective method to quantify the gross dissection time of pathologists' assistants (PAs) does not exist. We propose a method to calculate standardized work units (dissection time values [DTVs]) to monitor PA productivity.
METHODS: The Current Procedural Terminology system specifies six levels of specimen complexity encompassing 176 unique specimen types. Using our institutional dictionary, we designated all specimen types into a priori five levels of complexity based on expected dissection time. We hypothesized that expected time could be matched prospectively with the actual measured dissection time for all specimens. Dissection time data were collected prospectively for 12,775 specimens at two tertiary academic medical centers, and work effort was converted to a numeric DTV equivalent (number of minutes to dissect single specimen/420 minutes in a working day).
RESULTS: For 44 of 155 specimen types, measured dissection time for the five "levels" was lower than expected dissection (P < .0001). Accordingly, those 44 specimen types were reclassified to a lower level.
CONCLUSIONS: A numeric standard of the work effort for dissection time for 155 specimen types was developed, validated, and then used prospectively to monitor grossing efficiency of PA workforce. © American Society for Clinical Pathology, 2019. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.
OBJECTIVES: A validated and objective method to quantify the gross dissection time of pathologists' assistants (PAs) does not exist. We propose a method to calculate standardized work units (dissection time values [DTVs]) to monitor PA productivity.
METHODS: The Current Procedural Terminology system specifies six levels of specimen complexity encompassing 176 unique specimen types. Using our institutional dictionary, we designated all specimen types into a priori five levels of complexity based on expected dissection time. We hypothesized that expected time could be matched prospectively with the actual measured dissection time for all specimens. Dissection time data were collected prospectively for 12,775 specimens at two tertiary academic medical centers, and work effort was converted to a numeric DTV equivalent (number of minutes to dissect single specimen/420 minutes in a working day).
RESULTS: For 44 of 155 specimen types, measured dissection time for the five "levels" was lower than expected dissection (P < .0001). Accordingly, those 44 specimen types were reclassified to a lower level.
CONCLUSIONS: A numeric standard of the work effort for dissection time for 155 specimen types was developed, validated, and then used prospectively to monitor grossing efficiency of PA workforce. © American Society for Clinical Pathology, 2019. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.
Entities:
Keywords:
zzm321990 Current Procedural Terminology (CPT); Gross dissection time (DTV); Gross examination; Pathologists’ assistants (PAs); Productivity; Surgical pathology
Mesh：
Year: 2019
PMID： 30880344 DOI： 10.1093/ajcp/aqz007
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Am J Clin Pathol ISSN： 0002-9173 Impact factor: 2.493