Pathologist workload, burnout, and wellness: connecting the dots.

No standard tool to measure pathologist workload currently exists. An accurate measure of workload is needed for determining the number of pathologists to be hired, distributing the workload fairly among pathologists, and assessing the overall cost of pathology consults. Initially, simple tools such as counting cases or slides were used to give an estimate of the workload. More recently, multiple workload models, including relative value units (RVUs), the Royal College of Pathologists (RCP) point system, Level 4 Equivalent (L4E), Work2Quality (W2Q), and the University of Washington, Seattle (UW) slide count method, have been developed. There is no "ideal" model that is universally accepted. The main differences among the models come from the weights assigned to different specimen types, differential calculations for organs, and the capture of additional tasks needed for safe and timely patient care. Academic centers tend to see more complex cases that require extensive sampling and additional testing, while community-based and private laboratories deal more with biopsies. Additionally, some systems do not account for teaching, participation in multidisciplinary rounds, quality assurance activities, and medical oversight. A successful workload model needs to be continually updated to reflect the current state of practice.Awareness about physician burnout has gained attention in recent years and has been added to the World Health Organization's International Classification of Diseases (World Health Organization, WHO) as an occupational phenomenon. However, the extent to which this affects pathologists is not well understood. According to the WHO, burnout syndrome is diagnosed by the presence of three components: emotional exhaustion, depersonalization from one's work (cynicism related to one's job), and a low sense of personal achievement or accomplishment. Three drivers of burnout are the demand for productivity, lack of recognition, and electronic health records. Prominent consequences of physician burnout are economic and personal costs to the public and to the providers.Wellness is physical and mental well-being that allows individuals to manage stress effectively and to thrive in both their professional and personal lives. To achieve wellness, it is necessary to understand the root causes of burnout, including over-work and working under stressful conditions. Wellness is more than the absence of stress or burnout, and the responsibility of wellness should be shared by pathologists themselves, their healthcare organization, and governing bodies. Each pathologist needs to take their own path to achieve wellness.

Workload Measurement in Subspecialty Placental Pathology in Canada.

BACKGROUND: Workload measurement is important to help determine optimal staffing and workload distribution for pathology laboratories. The Level 4 Equivalent (L4E) System is the most widely used Anatomical Pathology (AP) workload measurement tool in Canada. However, it was initially not developed with subspecialties in mind. METHODS: In 2016, a Pan-Canadian Pediatric-Perinatal Pathology Workload Committee (PCPPPWC) was organized to adapt the L4E System to assess Pediatric-Perinatal Pathology workload. Four working groups were formed. The Placental Pathology Working Group was tasked to develop a scheme for fair valuation of placental specimens signed out by subspecialists in the context of the L4E System. Previous experience, informal time and motion studies, a survey of Canadian Pediatric-Perinatal Pathologists, and interviews of Pathologists' Assistants (PA) informed the development of such scheme. RESULTS: A workload measurement scheme with average L4E workload values for examination and reporting of singleton and multiple gestation placentas was proposed. The proposal was approved by the Canadian Association of Pathologist - Association canadienne des pathologistes Workload and Human Resources Committee for adoption into the L4E System. CONCLUSION: The development of a workload measurement model for placental specimens provides an average and fair valuation of these specimen types, enabling its use for resource planning and workload distribution.

Pathologist workload, work distribution and significant absences or departures at a regional hospital laboratory.

OBJECTIVE: Assess the work environment of salaried pathologists via (1) the national workload system (L4E), (2) work distribution among/in three hospital groups, and (3) the frequency of significant absences or departures (SADs). METHODS: Automated analysis of pathology reports from a regional laboratory (accessioned 2011-2019) using validated computer code. RESULTS: The study set contained 574,099 pathology reports, reported by 63 pathologists. The average yearly L4E workload units/full-time equivalent for three hospital groups were 8,101.6, 6,906.5 and 4,215.8. The average Gini coefficient for full-time pathologists in the three hospital groups were respectively 0.05, 0.16 and 0.23. The average yearly SADs rates were respectively 13%, 16% and 9%. The group with the highest SADs rate had the intermediate Gini coefficient and intermediate workload. CONCLUSIONS: High individual workload and work maldistribution appear to be associated with SADs. Individual workload maximums and greater transparency may be essential for limiting staff turnover, maintaining high morale, and efficient laboratory function with a high quality of care.

CAP-ACP Workload Model for Advanced Diagnostics in Precision Medicine.

OBJECTIVES: In precision medicine, where oncologic management is tailored to the individual's clinical and genetic profiles, advanced diagnostic testing provides prognostic information and guides management in a growing number of malignancies. There is a need to capture the work pathologists perform to meet this demand by providing medically relevant, timely, and accurate testing results. This work includes not only direct patient consults (interpretation of results and issuing reports) but the administrative and medical oversight as well as the research needed to provide the necessary quality assurance, quality control, direction, and framework for the laboratory. METHODS: An expert panel of Canadian pathologists involved in advanced diagnostics was convened to establish and beta test a model for workload assessment in advanced diagnostics. RESULTS: All aspects of the advanced diagnostics workload were detailed and applied to models based on members' experience, including medical oversight, administration, and the introduction of new testing and platforms. Models for biomarker testing were developed for simple and complex or multiplexed assays, and a detailed model was developed to assess the workload for next-generation sequencing-based assays. CONCLUSIONS: This paper provides the first detailed proposal for capturing an advanced diagnostic workload to enable appropriate pathologist allotment for performing all the steps required to run an advanced diagnostic service.

Evolution of anatomic pathology workload from 2011 to 2019 assessed in a regional hospital laboratory via 574,093 pathology reports.

OBJECTIVE: Quantify changes in workload in relation to the anatomic pathologist workforce. METHODS: In house pathology reports for cytology and surgical specimens from a regional hospital laboratory over a nine- year period (2011-2019) were analyzed, using custom computer code. Report length for the diagnosis+microscopic+synoptic report, number of blocks, billing classification (L86x codes), billings, national workload model (L4E 2018), regional workload model (W2Q), case count, and pathologist workforce in full-time equivalents (FTEs) were quantified. Randomly selected cases (n = 1,100) were audited to assess accuracy. RESULTS: The study period had 574,093 pathology reports that could be analyzed. The coding accuracy was estimated at 95%. From 2011 to 2019: cases/year decreased 6% (66,056 to 61,962), blocks/year increased 20% (236,197 to 283,751), L4E workload units increased 23% (165,276 to 203,894), W2Q workload units increased 21% (149,841 to 181,321), report lines increased 19% (606,862 to 723,175), workforce increased 1% (30.42 to 30.77 FTEs), billings increased 13% ($6,766,927 to $7,677,109). W2Q in relation to L4E underweights work in practices with large specimens by up to a factor of 2x. CONCLUSIONS: Work by L4E for large specimens is underrated by W2Q. Reporting requirements and pathology work-up have increased workload per pathology case. Work overall has increased significantly without a commensurate workforce increase. The significant practice changes in the pathology work environment should prompt local investment in the anatomic pathology workforce.

What is the best indicator to determine anatomic pathology workload? Canadian experience.

Health care resources in Canada are limited, and there is tremendous pressure to reduce laboratory budgets. It is almost impossible to acquire new pathologist positions to adequately meet service demands. There is a need to determine objectively the appropriate pathologist workload. I looked at multiple indicators (total accessioned cases, number of specimens, slides, blocks, Royal College of Pathologists [London, England] model, population served, and level 4 equivalent [L4E]) that might reflect the pathologist's work and determine which indicators are the best. L4E is a calculated weighted value based on complexity levels of individual anatomic pathology consultation. Of all indicators analyzed, L4E is the best reflection of a pathologist's anatomic pathology work because it has the best statistical values, is a direct output measurement of pathologist consultations, and uses data routinely collected in many North American laboratories.

Guidelines from the Canadian Association of Pathologists for establishing a telepathology service for anatomic pathology using whole-slide imaging.

The use of telepathology for clinical applications in Canada has steadily become more attractive over the last 10 years, driven largely by its potential to provide rapid pathology consulting services throughout the country regardless of the location of a particular institution. Based on this trend, the president of the Canadian Association of Pathologists asked a working group consisting of pathologists, technologists, and healthcare administrators from across Canada to oversee the development of guidelines to provide Canadian pathologists with basic information on how to implement and use this technology. The guidelines were systematically developed, based on available medical literature and the clinical experience of early adopters of telepathology in Canada. While there are many different modalities and applications of telepathology, this document focuses specifically on whole-slide imaging as applied to intraoperative pathology consultation (frozen section), primary diagnosis, expert or second opinions and quality assurance activities. Applications such as hematopathology, microbiology, tumour boards, education, research and technical and/or standard-related issues are not covered.