| Autor: |
Griffiths, D. F. R., Melia, J., McWilliam, L. J., Ball, R. Y., Grigor, K., Harnden, P., Jarmulowicz, M., Montironi, R., Moseley, R., Waller, M., Moss, S., Parkinson, M. C. |
| Předmět: |
|
| Zdroj: |
Histopathology; May2006, Vol. 48 Issue 6, p655-662, 8p, 1 Diagram, 4 Charts |
| Abstrakt: |
Aims: To test the effectiveness of a teaching resource (a decision tree with diagnostic criteria based on published literature) in improving the proficiency of Gleason grading of prostatic cancer by general pathologists. Methods: A decision tree with diagnostic criteria was developed by a panel of urological pathologists during a reproducibility study. Twenty-four general histopathologists tested this teaching resource. Twenty slides were selected to include a range of Gleason score groups 2–4, 5–6, 7 and 8–10. Interobserver agreement was studied before and after a presentation of the decision tree and criteria. The results were compared with those of the panel of urological pathologists. Results: Before the teaching session, 83% of readings agreed within ± 1 of the panel's consensus scores. Interobserver agreement was low (κ = 0.33) compared with that for the panel (κ = 0.62). After the presentation, 90% of readings agreed within ± 1 of the panel's consensus scores and interobserver agreement amongst the pathologists increased to κ = 0.41. Most improvement in agreement was seen for the Gleason score group 5–6. Conclusions: The lower level of agreement among general pathologists highlights the need to improve observer reproducibility. Improvement associated with a single training session is likely to be limited. Additional strategies include external quality assurance and second opinion within cancer networks. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Databáze: |
Complementary Index |
| Externí odkaz: |
|
