Objectives: Inconsistencies in pathology reporting can contribute to treatment delays and, potentially, inadequate or inappropriate postoperative therapy for patients with malignant disease. Given their importance, there is growing interest in optimizing the reproducibility and readability of pathology reports. The purpose of this study was twofold: (1) to assess the quality and completeness of current head and neck pathology reports in the Calgary Health Region and (2) to examine the effects of a standardized pathology report on clinician comprehension and proposed patient management.
Methods: A retrospective review examining the quality and completeness of current head and neck pathology reports was conducted. This was followed by a prospective survey of Canadian head and neck surgeons. Participants were asked to read a traditional freeform pathology report and a standardized pathology report and then complete a brief questionnaire. Comparisons between the responses were then made.
Results: Our retrospective analysis demonstrated considerable variation in the completeness of current freeform head and neck pathology reports. The results from our prospective survey establish that our standardized pathology report required significantly less time to read and was preferred by the majority of respondents. In addition, comprehension tended to be higher after reading the standardized pathology report.
Conclusion: Standardized pathology reports are known to enhance report quality and consistency. We demonstrate in this study that they require less time to read, are better received, and do not negatively impact reading comprehension, potentially making them an effective and feasible alternative to traditional, freeform pathology reports.