Use of cytology as a diagnostic method in veterinary practice and assessment of communication between veterinary practitioners and veterinary clinical pathologists

Mary M Christopher, Christine S. Hotz, Sonjia M. Shelly, Paul D. Pion

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

11 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective - To determine the extent of use of cytology as a diagnostic method in veterinary practice and assess how veterinarians in practice communicate with veterinary clinical pathologists. Design - Online survey. Study Population - 870 veterinarians. Procedures - An online survey was made available to members of the Veterinary Information Network from October 1, 2004, through December 1, 2004. Results - Respondents reported obtaining a median of 7 cytology samples weekly (range, 0 to 100). On average, respondents reported that 48.1% of the samples they collected were evaluated in-house, 29.5% were submitted to a veterinary diagnostic laboratory, and 21.6% were evaluated in-house and then submitted to a diagnostic laboratory. Most respondents (89.2%) reported using cytologic assessments to guide additional testing, and most (80.3%) indicated that they found the comments section of the cytology report to be the most important section. When asked to indicate the importance of various factors in their decision to use cytology as a diagnostic method, respondents overwhelmingly indicated that accuracy was very important. The most common reasons for consulting with a clinical pathologist were to discuss a discrepancy between clinical and cytologic findings, to clarify a diagnosis, and to ascertain the pathologist's confidence in a diagnosis. Respondents expressed more confidence in results when board-certified clinical pathologists were examining cytology samples than when others were. Conclusions and Clinical Relevance - Results suggested that improving communication between veterinary practitioners and veterinary clinical pathologists could enhance the diagnostic value of cytologic examinations and improve clinical decision-making.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)747-754
Number of pages8
JournalJournal of the American Veterinary Medical Association
Volume232
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 1 2008

Fingerprint

communication (human)
cell biology
diagnostic techniques
veterinarians
Cell Biology
Communication
Veterinarians
information networks
disease diagnosis
sampling
decision making
Information Services
Pathologists
Surveys and Questionnaires
testing
Population

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • veterinary(all)

Cite this

@article{f8ec0529b62d4add868b25f192bda18d,
title = "Use of cytology as a diagnostic method in veterinary practice and assessment of communication between veterinary practitioners and veterinary clinical pathologists",
abstract = "Objective - To determine the extent of use of cytology as a diagnostic method in veterinary practice and assess how veterinarians in practice communicate with veterinary clinical pathologists. Design - Online survey. Study Population - 870 veterinarians. Procedures - An online survey was made available to members of the Veterinary Information Network from October 1, 2004, through December 1, 2004. Results - Respondents reported obtaining a median of 7 cytology samples weekly (range, 0 to 100). On average, respondents reported that 48.1{\%} of the samples they collected were evaluated in-house, 29.5{\%} were submitted to a veterinary diagnostic laboratory, and 21.6{\%} were evaluated in-house and then submitted to a diagnostic laboratory. Most respondents (89.2{\%}) reported using cytologic assessments to guide additional testing, and most (80.3{\%}) indicated that they found the comments section of the cytology report to be the most important section. When asked to indicate the importance of various factors in their decision to use cytology as a diagnostic method, respondents overwhelmingly indicated that accuracy was very important. The most common reasons for consulting with a clinical pathologist were to discuss a discrepancy between clinical and cytologic findings, to clarify a diagnosis, and to ascertain the pathologist's confidence in a diagnosis. Respondents expressed more confidence in results when board-certified clinical pathologists were examining cytology samples than when others were. Conclusions and Clinical Relevance - Results suggested that improving communication between veterinary practitioners and veterinary clinical pathologists could enhance the diagnostic value of cytologic examinations and improve clinical decision-making.",
author = "Christopher, {Mary M} and Hotz, {Christine S.} and Shelly, {Sonjia M.} and Pion, {Paul D.}",
year = "2008",
month = "3",
day = "1",
doi = "10.2460/javma.232.5.747",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "232",
pages = "747--754",
journal = "Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association",
issn = "0003-1488",
publisher = "American Veterinary Medical Association",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Use of cytology as a diagnostic method in veterinary practice and assessment of communication between veterinary practitioners and veterinary clinical pathologists

AU - Christopher, Mary M

AU - Hotz, Christine S.

AU - Shelly, Sonjia M.

AU - Pion, Paul D.

PY - 2008/3/1

Y1 - 2008/3/1

N2 - Objective - To determine the extent of use of cytology as a diagnostic method in veterinary practice and assess how veterinarians in practice communicate with veterinary clinical pathologists. Design - Online survey. Study Population - 870 veterinarians. Procedures - An online survey was made available to members of the Veterinary Information Network from October 1, 2004, through December 1, 2004. Results - Respondents reported obtaining a median of 7 cytology samples weekly (range, 0 to 100). On average, respondents reported that 48.1% of the samples they collected were evaluated in-house, 29.5% were submitted to a veterinary diagnostic laboratory, and 21.6% were evaluated in-house and then submitted to a diagnostic laboratory. Most respondents (89.2%) reported using cytologic assessments to guide additional testing, and most (80.3%) indicated that they found the comments section of the cytology report to be the most important section. When asked to indicate the importance of various factors in their decision to use cytology as a diagnostic method, respondents overwhelmingly indicated that accuracy was very important. The most common reasons for consulting with a clinical pathologist were to discuss a discrepancy between clinical and cytologic findings, to clarify a diagnosis, and to ascertain the pathologist's confidence in a diagnosis. Respondents expressed more confidence in results when board-certified clinical pathologists were examining cytology samples than when others were. Conclusions and Clinical Relevance - Results suggested that improving communication between veterinary practitioners and veterinary clinical pathologists could enhance the diagnostic value of cytologic examinations and improve clinical decision-making.

AB - Objective - To determine the extent of use of cytology as a diagnostic method in veterinary practice and assess how veterinarians in practice communicate with veterinary clinical pathologists. Design - Online survey. Study Population - 870 veterinarians. Procedures - An online survey was made available to members of the Veterinary Information Network from October 1, 2004, through December 1, 2004. Results - Respondents reported obtaining a median of 7 cytology samples weekly (range, 0 to 100). On average, respondents reported that 48.1% of the samples they collected were evaluated in-house, 29.5% were submitted to a veterinary diagnostic laboratory, and 21.6% were evaluated in-house and then submitted to a diagnostic laboratory. Most respondents (89.2%) reported using cytologic assessments to guide additional testing, and most (80.3%) indicated that they found the comments section of the cytology report to be the most important section. When asked to indicate the importance of various factors in their decision to use cytology as a diagnostic method, respondents overwhelmingly indicated that accuracy was very important. The most common reasons for consulting with a clinical pathologist were to discuss a discrepancy between clinical and cytologic findings, to clarify a diagnosis, and to ascertain the pathologist's confidence in a diagnosis. Respondents expressed more confidence in results when board-certified clinical pathologists were examining cytology samples than when others were. Conclusions and Clinical Relevance - Results suggested that improving communication between veterinary practitioners and veterinary clinical pathologists could enhance the diagnostic value of cytologic examinations and improve clinical decision-making.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=41749123470&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=41749123470&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.2460/javma.232.5.747

DO - 10.2460/javma.232.5.747

M3 - Article

C2 - 18312185

AN - SCOPUS:41749123470

VL - 232

SP - 747

EP - 754

JO - Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association

JF - Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association

SN - 0003-1488

IS - 5

ER -