CP training?

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

sweetymd

Full Member
10+ Year Member
15+ Year Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2007
Messages
28
Reaction score
0
I realize that most advise in favor of becoming dual certified (AP/CP), particularly if you might won't to go the way of prvt practice, but I'm trying to make a major decision and would like some input in case things are changing....
Is it more advisable to stick with AP/CP or AP only with a 1 or 2 fellowships. Will the lack of CP hurt?

Also, what are the benefits to training in Informatics?

Members don't see this ad.
 
Last edited:
Things don't seem to be changing. Just look at the job posts on path outlines. Most private jobs want someone with AP and CP training, whereas most academic jobs are OK with AP only. CP is nice to do because they're easy rotations and you can save some of them for when it's time to study for boards. I probably had about 2 hours a day of work to do while studying for boards, which was really nice. If you don't mind CP I think you should do it so you have more options available to you. If you absolutely hate it, and don't mind limiting yourself to academics, then you should be fine without it.
 
If you're pretty sure you will stay in academia, AP only would be fine. There are rare private practice jobs that will hire AP only. I have a friend who is part of a large practice (>40 pathologists covering 9 hospitals) and he is AP only. The lucky guy doesn't have to worry about being forced to be a medical director or ever taking CP call. Though, his original plan was to stay academic but was lucky that this job came along and he just happened to be exactly what they were looking for.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
CP is the only boarded medical specialty where most of the people boarded in it cannot even tell you what it is. Ask residents at your program "What does a clinical pathologist do all day?" and you will get blank stares. CP is not an actual job, just a board exam and few months in residency that are lighter and give you a few extra facts to help answer some questions every now and then in private practice.
 
CP is the only boarded medical specialty where most of the people boarded in it cannot even tell you what it is. Ask residents at your program "What does a clinical pathologist do all day?" and you will get blank stares. CP is not an actual job, just a board exam and few months in residency that are lighter and give you a few extra facts to help answer some questions every now and then in private practice.

So why don't we just take the good parts of CP and incorporate them into a generalized "pathology" residency and forget about the double board?
 
so why don't we just take the good parts of cp and incorporate them into a generalized "pathology" residency and forget about the double board?

bingo.


Winning.
 
My suspicion is that when recertification times start rolling around at the end of 10 yrs of MOC, a significant number of people won't &/or won't successfully recert in CP. Sure, a lot of jobs advertise that they want AP/CP, but I'm not convinced that many jobs have you actually utilize it. If a practice is running a clinical lab they typically have a CP-only or CP-strong individual or two running it and practically speaking very little work for everyone else. If you can be a laboratory medical director without CP boards, I see no reason you can't cover call for the same lab -- There may come a time when that sentiment is the prevailing one, when oldies drop CP and newbies follow suit by never boarding in it to begin with.

That doesn't mean many jobs won't still prefer AP/CP for another 8-15 years, though I suspect we'll see a change by around the end of that timeframe.
 
I'm going to graduate AP/CP because I fell for that same hedge-your-bets argument, but I'm only going to sit for the AP boards. I despise CP. Can't stand it. But I got the same "you'll never find a job" speech from everyone, unless I wanted to stay in academia (which I'm also not that fond of). But technically I can say I was trained in CP if some private practice wanted me to cover call or something. And I know AP-only people out there that run private practice labs and do the CP work at small hospitals. When it comes down to it, there's no absolute requirement for CP training to do CP in practice. If you're a board-certified pathologist you can run a lab.
 
So what are the good parts of CP? Chemistry and Microbiology seem like they don't need a pathologist. Transfusion medicine and hematopathology, I would think, definitely do need a pathologist. Is this right?

Also, CP boards are allegedly extremely difficult, AP boards are easy... But residents graduating from pathology residencies feel insecure signing out surgical pathology? So much so that it's not uncommon to finish a non-board certified surgical pathology fellowship? But they hardly do any CP?

The whole pathology training system seems a little backwards.
 
The curse of pathology training is that at few to zero points are you allowed to completely be The One with simply the "option" of calling your attending. Most other residencies allow greater actionable responsibility -- not only formulating but implementing a course of action, with all its ups and downs. I particularly enjoyed and I think learned the most on a long rural rotation during a year of clinical internship, largely because of the relative autonomy I was afforded. Unfortunately, lack of need combined with inability to bill for much of what a pathology resident might otherwise sign out means many programs have no great system for increasing the responsibility of even final year residents. The good programs find a way to do this to some extent, but systematically it's just not that great. I don't think it's a problem of never learning how to sign X, Y, or Z out, it's a problem of never getting a chance to really do so on one's own until AFTER residency. For some that equals a lack of confidence..but not necessarily a lack of competence per se.

Personally, I do think the CP disciplines should have appropriate pathologist oversight. However, because very little has a billing component requiring a pathologist, the trend has been that pathologists leave day-to-day activities to senior techs...which doesn't really bode well for maintaining competent authority over the lab, much less communicating intelligently with clinicians who may need questions answered, going forward.

I'm not entirely sure what you mean by the "good" parts of CP -- any CP discipline could have heavy pathologist involvement, but most don't require it. They are all pretty technician dependent. I've seen micro labs where the director was in there every day helping out or tracking certain cases, and others where that was decidedly not the case. As for the CP boards.. I don't think they're necessarily difficult, merely that most programs train only as much as their CP pathologists/PhD's work, which may not be a lot. When residents almost universally indicate they have a lot of free time on CP, this indicates to me they're simply not being trained (nor, by extension, being prepared for the CP boards).
 
I'm not entirely sure what you mean by the "good" parts of CP -- any CP discipline could have heavy pathologist involvement, but most don't require it. They are all pretty technician dependent. I've seen micro labs where the director was in there every day helping out or tracking certain cases, and others where that was decidedly not the case. As for the CP boards.. I don't think they're necessarily difficult, merely that most programs train only as much as their CP pathologists/PhD's work, which may not be a lot. When residents almost universally indicate they have a lot of free time on CP, this indicates to me they're simply not being trained (nor, by extension, being prepared for the CP boards).

Hey, when I said that there were "good" parts of CP, I was thinking about things like flow cytometry which require a pathologists direct interpretation. It could be that my conception of CP is way off in this respect (wouldn't be surprising), but it seems like some CP really requires a pathologist's interpretation, and the rest just requires someone to be a manager.
 
Also, CP boards are allegedly extremely difficult, AP boards are easy... But residents graduating from pathology residencies feel insecure signing out surgical pathology?

The boards are just tests. They don't necessarily assess your ability to sign out or perform day-to-day pathology.
 
Top