Teaching and assessing intra-operative consultations in competency-based medical education: development of a workplace-based assessment instrument.

Competency-based medical education (CBME) is being implemented worldwide. In CMBE, residency training is designed around competencies required for unsupervised practice and use entrustable professional activities (EPAs) as workplace "units of assessment". Well-designed workplace-based assessment (WBA) tools are required to document competence of trainees in authentic clinical environments. In this study, we developed a WBA instrument to assess residents' performance of intra-operative pathology consultations and conducted a validity investigation. The entrustment-aligned pathology assessment instrument for intra-operative consultations (EPA-IC) was developed through a national iterative consultation and used clinical supervisors to assess residents' performance at an anatomical pathology program. Psychometric analyses and focus groups were conducted to explore the sources of evidence using modern validity theory: content, response process, internal structure, relations to other variables, and consequences of assessment. The content was considered appropriate, the assessment was feasible and acceptable by residents and supervisors, and it had a positive educational impact by improving performance of intra-operative consultations and feedback to learners. The results had low reliability, which seemed to be related to assessment biases, and supervisors were reluctant to fully entrust trainees due to cultural issues. With CBME implementation, new workplace-based assessment tools are needed in pathology. In this study, we showcased the development of the first instrument for assessing resident's performance of a prototypical entrustable professional activity in pathology using modern education principles and validity theory.

Grading of Total Mesorectal Excision Specimens: Assessment of Interrater Agreement.

BACKGROUND: Total mesorectal excision is the standard of care for patients with rectal cancer. Pathological evaluation of the quality of the total mesorectal excision specimen is an important prognostic factor that correlates with local recurrence, but is potentially subjective. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine the degree of variation in grading, both between assessors and between fresh and formalin-fixed specimens. DESIGN: Raters included surgeons, pathologists, pathology residents, pathologists' assistants, and pathologists' assistant trainees. Specimens were assessed by up to 6 raters in the fresh state and by 2 raters postfixation. Four parameters were evaluated: mesorectal bulk, surface regularity, defects, and coning. Interrater agreement was measured using ordinal α-values. SETTING: The study was conducted at a single academic center. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was agreement between individuals when grading total mesorectal excision specimens. RESULTS: A total of 37 total mesorectal excision specimens were assessed. Reliability between all raters for fresh specimens for mesorectal bulk, surface regularity, defects, coning, and overall grade were 0.85, 0.85, 0.92, 0.84, and 0.91. When compared with all raters, pathologists and residents had higher agreement and pathologists and surgeons had lower agreement. Ordinal α-values comparing pathologist and pathologist's assistant agreement for overall grade were similar pre- and postfixation (0.78 vs 0.80), but agreement for assessing defects decreased postfixation. Among pathologists' assistants, agreement was higher when grading specimens postfixation than when grading fresh specimens. LIMITATIONS: Assessment bias may have occurred because of the greater number of pathologists' assistants participating than the number of residents and pathologists. CONCLUSIONS: The results indicate good interrater agreement for the assessment of overall grade, with defects showing the best interrater agreement in fresh specimens. Although total mesorectal excision specimens may be consistently graded postfixation, the assessment of defects postfixation may be less reliable. This study highlights the need for additional knowledge-transfer activities to ensure consistency and accurate grading of total mesorectal excision specimens. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A497.

Developments in the assessment of venous invasion in colorectal cancer: implications for future practice and patient outcome.

Venous invasion, or "large vessel" invasion, is a known independent prognostic indicator of distant recurrence and survival in colorectal cancer. Accurate assessment of venous invasion is of particular importance in stage II disease because it may influence the decision to administer adjuvant therapy. Venous invasion is widely believed to be an underreported finding with significant variability in its reported incidence. In the most recent College of American Pathologists' cancer reporting protocol, venous invasion is not recorded separately from lymphovascular, or "small vessel" invasion, which may not be appropriate because these features confer differing prognostic information. The presence of extramural venous invasion is strongly predictive of adverse outcome, although the prognostic significance of intramural venous invasion remains unknown. There are no formal guidelines regarding the pathologic assessment of venous invasion or the application of specific reporting criteria. The routine use of an elastic stain results in an almost 3-fold increase in the venous invasion detection rate when compared with a standard hematoxylin and eosin stain and may be a cost-effective means of increasing the diagnostic yield of venous invasion. The development of high-resolution magnetic resonance imaging, where extramural venous invasion can be detected preoperatively, may also influence the manner in which pathologists process specimens. This review focuses on recent developments in the assessment of venous invasion and highlights their potential impact on future practice.

Current practice patterns among pathologists in the assessment of venous invasion in colorectal cancer.

AIMS: Venous invasion (VI) is a known independent prognostic indicator of recurrence and survival in colorectal cancer. The guidelines of the Royal College of Pathologists (RCPath) state that, in a series of resections, extramural VI should be detected in at least 25% of specimens. However, there is widespread variability in the reported incidence, and this may affect patient access to adjuvant therapy. This study aims to clarify the current practice patterns of pathologists regarding the assessment of VI and to identify factors associated with an increased self-reported VI detection rate. METHODS: A population-based survey was mailed to 361 pathologists in the province of Ontario, Canada. RESULTS: The overall response rate was 64.9%. Most pathologists were practicing in community-based centres (66.2%) and approximately half had been in practice for over 15 years (53.5%). A subspecialist interest in gastrointestinal (GI) pathology was declared by 27.3% of pathologists. The majority of pathologists (70.2%) reported that they detected VI in less than 10% of resection specimens, with only 9.1% reporting VI detection rates above 20%. Standardised reporting criteria were applied by 62.1%. Special stains were employed by 57.6% if VI was suspected on H&E-stained sections. Practice in a university-affiliated centre, a subspecialist interest in GI pathology and the acceptance of the 'orphan arteriole' sign were all independently associated with a self-reported VI detection rate above 10% on multivariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Self-reported VI detection rates are low among most pathologists. Even among specialist GI pathologists practicing in university-affiliated centres, few reported a detection rate close to that recommended by the RCPath. Strategies to increase the detection of VI may be required.

The total mesorectal excision specimen for rectal cancer: a review of its pathological assessment.

Total mesorectal excision (TME) refers to the surgical removal of the complete perirectal soft tissue envelope, using sharp instruments under direct vision, and has become the contemporary standard of care for patients with rectal cancer. Pathologists play a key role in the evaluation of these specimens, including the quality assurance of surgical performance, as well as evaluation of the circumferential radial margin (CRM). While the latter is the most significant predictor of local recurrence, the quality of the excised mesorectum is another important factor in assessing the risk of local recurrence in patients with a negative CRM. Since proper pathological assessment of the TME specimen provides important prognostic information, as well as critical feedback to surgeons regarding technical performance, it is important to have adequate guidelines for the macroscopic handling of these specimens. The CLASSICC study of the Medical Research Council in the United Kingdom, as well as the Dutch TME trial have introduced a new standard for the pathological assessment of TME specimens, including an approach that involves assessment in both the fresh and fixed states, at least 48 hours of fixation of an intact specimen, with observations made on both the external appearance and cross-sectional slices. This article reviews the pathological assessment of the TME specimen, including basic definitions, current international guidelines, an approach to evaluating the mesorectum and a discussion of special issues relating to margins, lymph node retrieval and effects of neoadjuvant therapy.