Status of pathology professionals.

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The status of basic, general and specialist workforces in pathology services in Nepal needs to be defined and explored for better pathology services. The objective of the study was to find out the status of laboratory medicine professionals (pathology workforces) and the regulation of ethics and limitations of the different level of workforces. METHODS: A cross-sectional descriptive study was conducted by observing and taking interview with the head of the clinical private institutions from August 2008 to January 2009. A total of 373 private pathology laboratories and the workforces working over there were included in the study. RESULTS: The workforces heading private pathology services showed that 153 (41%) of laboratories were headed by laboratory assistant, 79 (21%) by laboratory technician, 90 (24%) by (medical technologist) pathology officer, 30 (8%) by histocytopathologist and 21 (6%) by non pathology professionals. Officer level Pathology workforce (eligible to work independently) was 113 (30%) whereas 260 (70%) of laboratories had no such workforces. Intermediate level Pathology workforce (eligible to work dependently and for some investigation independently) was 34% (127/373) where as 66% (246/373) of laboratories were lacking such workforces. Specialist level (MD/M. Sc) workforces in histocytopathology, clinical microbiology and cytopatholgy & hematology were 43 (11%), 10 (3%) and 3 (1%) respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The workforces heading the private laboratories were not according to the norms of good laboratory practices. The workforces had crossed their limitations and ethical barrier in performing pathological investigations which did not abide by the rules and regulations made by respective councils of Nepal by pathology workforces. There was intervention of non medical/clinical workforce in laboratory services especially in microbiology and biochemistry.