Enhancing the pathologist's role at hospital tumor boards

Annals of Clinical and Laboratory Science

Volumn 36, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 243-247

  Strobel, Stephen L ^a  

^a ST VINCENT MERCY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

Cancer education; Pathologists; Tumor board

Indexed keywords

HOSPITAL MANAGEMENT; HOSPITAL PERSONNEL; MALIGNANT NEOPLASTIC DISEASE; MEDICAL SPECIALIST; ONCOLOGY; PATHOLOGIST; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUESTIONNAIRE; REVIEW;

NEOPLASMS; PATHOLOGY, CLINICAL; PHYSICIAN'S ROLE; PROFESSIONAL STAFF COMMITTEES;

EID: 33748250308     PISSN: 00917370     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Review

References (16)

1. Bakemeier RF, Beck S, Murphy JR. Educational and consultative functions, topics, and methods of hospital general tumor conferences, J Cancer Educ 1995;9:217-225.
2. Forman WB, Haykus W. Tumor conference: the role of continuing medical education, J Contin Educ Health Prof 1988;8:267-270.
3. Guinan PD, Imperato JP, Chmiel JS, Vogelzang NJ, Sylvester J. Cancer conferences. Can they be improved? Cancer Pract 1997;5:305-308.
4. Nyquist JG. An educational intervention to improve hospital tumor conferences, J Cancer Educ 1995;10:71-77.
5. Radecki SE, Nyquist JG, Gates JD, Abrahamson S, Henson DE. Educational characteristics of tumor conferences in teaching and non-teaching hospitals, J Cancer Educ 1995;9:204-216.
6. Petty JK, Vetto JT. Beyond doughnuts: tumor board recommendations influence patient care. J Cancer Educ 2002;17:97-100.
7. Vetto JT, Richert-Boe K, Desler M, DuFrain L, Hagen H. Tumor board formats: "fascinating case" versus "working conference." J Cancer Educ 1996;11:84-88.
8. Commission on Cancer, Cancer Program Standards, American College of Surgeons, Chicago, 2004; pp 21-24.
9. College of American Pathologists. Cancer Protocols and Checklists. Available at: http://www.CAP.org. Updated 2 Nov 2005.
10. Powsner SM, Costa J, Homer RJ, Clinicians are from Mars and pathologists are from Venus. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2000;124:1040-1046.
11. Wakely SL, Baxendine-Jones JA, Gallagher PJ, Mullee M, Pickering R. Aberrant diagnoses by individual surgical pathologists. Am J Surg Pathol 1998;22:77-82.
12. Zarbo RJ, Nakhleh RE, Walsh M. Customer satisfaction in anatomic pathology. A College of American Pathologists Q-Probes study of 3065 physician surveys from 94 laboratories. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2003;127: 23-29.
13. Lopez-Beltran A, Mikuz G, Luque RJ, Mazzucchelli R, Montironi R. Current practice of Gleason grading of prostate carcinoma. Virchows Arch 2005;23:1-8.
14. Meyer JS, Alvarez C, Milikowski C, Olson N, Russo I, Russo J, Glass A, Zehnbauer BA, Lister K, Parwaresch R, Cooperative Breast Cancer Tissue Resource. Breast carcinoma malignancy grading by Bloom-Richardson system vs. proliferation index: reproducibility of grade and advantages of proliferation index. Mod Pathol 2005; 18:1067-1078.
15. Strobel SL. A role for pathologists and registrars in the education of patients with prostate cancer. J Reg Manage 2002;29:15-17.
16. Strobel SL, Tatchell T. The surgical pathology report as an educational tool for cancer patients. Ann Clin Lab Sci 2002;32:363-368.