Argue that pathology explanation clinics—where pathologists discuss findings directly with patients—deserve recognition as part of pathology’s ongoing evolution.
Approach:
Personal experience: The author recounts a pathologist explaining a digitized slide and diagnosis in plain language, prompting the question of why such conversations are not more common.
Examples of existing clinics: The author names Mayo Clinic locations in Rochester and Florida, Duke Health, Tufts Medical, Endeavor Health, and Michigan Medicine as institutions with pathology explanation clinics.
Proposed value: The author argues that these clinics can support patient understanding, agency, and engagement; increase pathologist visibility and purpose; ease ordering physicians’ report-interpretation burden; and strengthen patient and institutional satisfaction and loyalty.
Key Findings:
The author reports that some institutions have incorporated pathology explanation clinics into their care models.
The author argues that direct explanations from pathologists can reduce patients’ fear and confusion and help them participate in discussions about their care.
The author argues that these clinics can ease ordering physicians’ burden of interpreting technical reports and strengthen patient and institutional satisfaction and loyalty.
Interpretation:
The author frames patient-facing pathology clinics as a developing chapter in the specialty’s evolution, extending the pathologist’s role beyond laboratory diagnosis to direct communication with patients.
Limitations:
The provided opinion piece presents no study methods, quantitative results, or comparative evidence for the benefits it describes.
Claims about patient, institutional, and pathologist outcomes are the author’s assertions and are not supported by data in the provided text.
Conclusion:
The author suggests that pathology’s next chapter may include pathologists explaining diagnostic findings directly to patients.
