I’m currently on a month of neuropathology/autopsy at our main academic center. After 2 months at a busy surgpath site with a 1-1.5 hour drive each way, it’s finally nice to be able to take a breather. Here, I’m responsible for any neuro frozen and grossing that doesn’t go to the SP resident, helping with the cutting of autopsy brains, and sign-out of neuropath cases. Since we don’t have a heavy neurosurgery service, this allows me more time to learn at my own pace and I feel that I’m able to retain more.
Not including CP rotations, I’ve always learned more, retained knowledge, and performed better on the subspecialty rotations that I’ve had – hematopathology, pediatric pathology, and now neuropathology. While I acknowledge that part of this is my own fault because when I’m on surgical pathology (we do general SP sign-outs), I read up pretty much only on my cases. I know that I need to preview them for sign-out so I read up on the SP diagnoses and differentials. But I often am not motivated to read up on general systems, so I can be real hot mess (and as one senior resident called me recently, “stupid”) during unknown conferences. In CP topics and those subspecialty areas I’ve had rotations in, I’m quite the opposite and tend to excel.
Yesterday, was the first time I’ve been at consensus conference since my first year. At the community and VA hospitals where I’ve spent most of my SP rotations during my second year, we didn’t have group consensus conferences. I remember last year thinking during consensus, “please don’t pick on me to answer a question” during the inevitable pimp sessions that evolved. But yesterday, besides the fellow, I was the only senior resident present. But I was less apprehensive and intimidated than I had been when I sat in the same place the year before. So even though I don’t consider myself a person who is good at SP, I was adequate enough and I must have learned something over the past year without realizing it.
Obviously, how we teach surgical pathology is restricted by the type of sign-out practiced at the institution we are at and this often is dictated by specimen volumes, faculty expertise, and the cultural philosophy dominant there. Even though I thought that I had taken this question into consideration when interviewing and ranking programs, I realize now that I didn’t have a complete grasp on how training styles and cultures really would affect me. Probably since I’m graduate school trained first and naturally think more like a scientist that focuses on one area and learning everything about that area, subspecialty sign-out works best for me.
Before starting residency, I had an intuition that this was true but thought that I would eventually adapt to a general sign-out format since that is how my institution practices. And I’ve adjusted, albeit maybe not progressed as quickly as my peers. It’s difficult to maintain all surgical pathology as subspecialty unless the volume is high enough and this usually means a large, well-known academic center if that’s what you need during your training. The majority of residents will end up in private practice and many often train at places where the sign-out is a more generalized one. So how do we match our learning needs with practice requirements at our training institutions with our eventual responsibilities as a pathologist in terms of sign-out? I can’t say that I have a solution for this conundrum but would welcome opinions on the topic. What works best to train our residents in surgical pathology?
–Betty Chung, DO, MPH, MA is a second year resident physician at the University of Illinois Hospital and Health Sciences System in Chicago, IL.