Examining the role of diversity, equity, and inclusion in mitigating workforce burnout in laboratory medicine.

OBJECTIVES: The clinical laboratory workforce plays a crucial role in health care delivery, yet little is known about the unique pressures and challenges this workforce faces. The objective of this study was to identify factors that contribute to burnout, discrimination, exclusion, and inequity in pathology and laboratory medicine. METHODS: A nationwide survey was conducted in 2 phases. In phase 1, 2391 laboratory professionals were surveyed over a 1-week period about their experiences with burnout, discrimination, and work-related stress. In phase 2, the survey was extended to 1 month and questions were added to elicit more detailed information about diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) as well as wellness. RESULTS: Results showed a high prevalence of burnout, discrimination, and stress among laboratory professionals, with significant differences among certain demographic groups. Women, Black, indigenous, or people of color individuals and those with disabilities reported higher rates of discrimination. The study also showed a need for mentorship and resources to address educational barriers. CONCLUSIONS: Findings from this study highlight the urgent need for interventions to address burnout, discrimination, exclusion, and inequity in the laboratory workforce. Initiatives to increase workforce diversity, promote mentorship and diversity training programs, and improve recognition of the laboratory workforce are recommended. The results underscore the pressing need to addressing the challenges and apprehensions laboratory professionals face, including enhancing recognition of their role in patient care, tackling systemic problems related to discrimination and equity, and enhancing the provision of support and resources for managing burnout and fostering well-being.

Neuroendocrine differentiation in the setting of prostatic carcinoma: contemporary assessment of a consecutive series.

AIM: Clinicopathologic characterisation of a contemporary series of neuroendocrine (NE) differentiation in the setting of prostatic carcinoma (PCa) was examined. METHODS AND RESULTS: We reviewed institutional databases for in-house cases with a history of PCa and histopathologic evidence of NE differentiation during the disease course. In all, 79 cases were identified: 32 primary and 47 metastases. Metastatic lesions were in liver (n = 15), lymph node (n = 9), bone (n = 6), lung (n = 3), brain (n = 1), and other sites (n = 13). In all, 63 of 76 (82%) cases with NE differentiation and available history were posttherapy: six postradiation therapy (RT), 24 post- androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT), and 33 post-RT + ADT. Morphologic assessment (n = 79): (i) 23 pure small-cell/high-grade NE carcinoma (HGNEC): 20/23 metastatic; (ii) 10 combined high-grade PCa and small-cell/HGNEC: 9/10 primary; (iii) 15 PCa with diffuse NE immunohistochemistry (IHC) marker positivity/differentiation, associated with nested to sheet-like growth of cells with abundant cytoplasm and prominent nucleoli, yet diffuse positivity for at least one prostatic and one NE IHC marker: all metastatic; (iv) 11 PCa with patchy NE differentiation, displaying more than single-cell positivity for NE IHC: five primary / six metastatic; (v) nine PCa with focal NE marker positive cells: four primary / five metastatic; (vi) 11 PCa with 'Paneth cell-like' change: all primary. CONCLUSIONS: In this contemporary series, the majority of NE differentiation in the setting of PCa was seen posttherapy. We highlight the tendencies of small-cell/HGNEC and PCa with diffuse NE differentiation by IHC to occur in metastatic settings, while morphologically combined high-grade PCa + small-cell/HGNEC and 'Paneth cell-like' change occur in primary disease.

Implementation of Digital Pathology Offers Clinical and Operational Increase in Efficiency and Cost Savings.

CONTEXT.­: Digital pathology (DP) implementations vary in scale, based on aims of intended operation. Few laboratories have completed a full-scale DP implementation, which may be due to high overhead costs that disrupt the traditional pathology workflow. Neither standardized criteria nor benchmark data have yet been published showing practical return on investment after implementing a DP platform. OBJECTIVE.­: To provide benchmark data and practical metrics to support operational efficiency and cost savings in a large academic center. DESIGN.­: Metrics reviewed include archived pathology asset retrieval; ancillary test request for recurrent/metastatic disease; cost analysis and turnaround time (TAT); and DP experience survey. RESULTS.­: Glass slide requests from the department slide archive and an off-site surgery center showed a 93% and 97% decrease, respectively. Ancillary immunohistochemical orders, compared in 2014 (52%)-before whole slide images (WSIs) were available in the laboratory information system-and 2017 (21%) showed $114 000/y in anticipated savings. Comprehensive comparative cost analysis showed a 5-year $1.3 million savings. Surgical resection cases with prior WSIs showed a 1-day decrease in TAT. A DP experience survey showed 80% of respondents agreed WSIs improved their clinical sign-out experience. CONCLUSIONS.­: Implementing a DP operation showed a noteworthy increase in efficiency and operational utility. Digital pathology deployments and operations may be gauged by the following metrics: number of glass slide requests as WSIs become available, decrease in confirmatory testing for patients with metastatic/recurrent disease, long-term decrease in off-site pathology asset costs, and faster TAT. Other departments may use our benchmark data and metrics to enhance patient care and demonstrate return on investment to justify adoption of DP.