Is it Cancer? Patient-Centered Pathology Reports vs. Standard Pathology Reports in a new study from the Department of Pathology at Michigan
By Lynn McCain | January 6
Imagine you are a patient who just had a biopsy completed. You wait nervously for the results and check your patient portal to see if any results have been received. After an anxious couple of days, you receive the results, only to read them and have no idea what they mean. It is Friday afternoon, your doctor’s office is closed, and you fret all weekend. This scenario plays out frequently and was the impetus for a research study conducted by Dr. Cathryn Lapedis and colleagues.
Lapedis and colleagues tested a patient-centered pathology report (PCPR) that focuses on presenting medical information in clear language that patients more readily understand. A cohort of 2,238 adults was recruited and randomly grouped into three groups. Each group was provided a PCPR, a standard university pathology report, or a Veteran’s Affairs (VA) pathology report, each presenting diagnostic information on prostate cancer, Gleason scores, and risk levels. Patients were then surveyed to determine how well they understood the information.
The study showed that the participants understood the report information much better when simple language was used as compared to the standard university or VA terminology. “While 93% of participants who received the PCPR accurately identified that the report showed prostate cancer, only 39% of those who received the university report and 56% of those who received the VA report did so (P < .001). Similarly, 93% of PCPR recipients accurately classified the report as showing either low or high risk vs 41% of university recipients and 36% of VA recipients (P < .001). Accuracy in reporting total Gleason score also differed by format (84% for the PCPR group vs 48% for the university group and 40% for the VA group; P < .001). Reported worry was significantly associated with risk level for PCPR recipients, with a higher level of worry in the high-risk scenario and a lower level of worry in the low-risk scenario compared with the other 2 conditions (P < .001).”
This study was published in JAMA and encourages hospital systems to consider including PCPRs with standard pathology reports to ensure patients have true access to their health information. Dr. Lapedis and colleagues aim to pilot the use of PCPRs in prostate cancer patients receiving diagnoses from the Department of Pathology at Michigan in an effort to support patient-centered care.
Citation:
Lapedis CJ, Kurnot SR, Bergholtz SE, et al. Knowledge and Worry Following Review of Standard vs Patient-Centered Pathology Reports. JAMA. Published online January 02, 2025. doi:10.1001/jama.2024.25461
ON THE COVER
ON THE COVER
ON THE COVER
ON THE COVER
ON THE COVER
ON THE COVER
ON THE COVER
ON THE COVER
ON THE COVER
ON THE COVER
