TY - JOUR
T1 - Questionnaire-based survey regarding the opinion of general pathologists on the need for oral pathology services
AU - Salian, Varsha
AU - Natarajan, Srikant
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2022 Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Pathology Published by Wolters Kluwer-Medknow.
PY - 2021/9/1
Y1 - 2021/9/1
N2 - Context: Oral and maxillofacial pathology (OMFP) is a subspecialization having a masters course in India. Due to lesser number of oral pathologists in the country, the biopsy material from the head and neck is catered to by the general pathologist. Aim: This survey was conducted to acquire responses from general pathologists and gathering knowledge on their perspective of oral pathology. Methods: Pathologists at various medical institutions and at laboratories all over Karnataka were requested to answer a questionnaire comprising 13 questions pertaining to the need and scope of oral pathology. Results: In total, 37 (57%) general pathologists completed the questionnaire, of whom 97% (36) were aware of the specialty and 30 (81%) perceived a need for it. Eleven (30%) of them referred oral biopsy specimens to oral pathologists. The most common sources of diagnostic difficulty were identified as odontogenic tumors and cysts. Twenty-six (70%) pathologists felt the need for a short-term posting for their postgraduates in oral pathology, while 28 (76%) of them expressed their opinion about considering an oral pathologist as a part of their team when diagnosing complex head and neck pathologies. Twelve (71%) of them mentioned that they sometimes found that head and neck lesions took longer time to diagnose. Conclusion: Although the utilization of OMFP specialists' services in the state is quite low, general pathologists strongly feel the need for OMFP training as head and neck specimens form a considerable proportion of biopsies received by them.
AB - Context: Oral and maxillofacial pathology (OMFP) is a subspecialization having a masters course in India. Due to lesser number of oral pathologists in the country, the biopsy material from the head and neck is catered to by the general pathologist. Aim: This survey was conducted to acquire responses from general pathologists and gathering knowledge on their perspective of oral pathology. Methods: Pathologists at various medical institutions and at laboratories all over Karnataka were requested to answer a questionnaire comprising 13 questions pertaining to the need and scope of oral pathology. Results: In total, 37 (57%) general pathologists completed the questionnaire, of whom 97% (36) were aware of the specialty and 30 (81%) perceived a need for it. Eleven (30%) of them referred oral biopsy specimens to oral pathologists. The most common sources of diagnostic difficulty were identified as odontogenic tumors and cysts. Twenty-six (70%) pathologists felt the need for a short-term posting for their postgraduates in oral pathology, while 28 (76%) of them expressed their opinion about considering an oral pathologist as a part of their team when diagnosing complex head and neck pathologies. Twelve (71%) of them mentioned that they sometimes found that head and neck lesions took longer time to diagnose. Conclusion: Although the utilization of OMFP specialists' services in the state is quite low, general pathologists strongly feel the need for OMFP training as head and neck specimens form a considerable proportion of biopsies received by them.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85123341852&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85123341852&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.4103/jomfp.jomfp_441_20
DO - 10.4103/jomfp.jomfp_441_20
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85123341852
SN - 0973-029X
VL - 25
SP - 485
EP - 489
JO - Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Pathology
JF - Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Pathology
IS - 3
ER -