The crisis in America's laboratories: it's every physician's business.
The crisis in America's laboratories: it's every physician's business.
复制标题
美国实验室的危机：这是每个医生的事。
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2005
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
L. Peterson
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
L. Peterson
我完全同意 Laine Stewart 对当今医疗保健环境中实验室专业人员状况的评估。[1]
实验室人员太少，空缺太多；鉴于其工作的重要性，他们的工资仍然过低；这个“系统”在某种程度上未能适当地挑战实验室专业人员，使他们的工作在整个职业生涯中保持令人兴奋的状态，而且，是的，太多人离开这个行业，去寻找薪水更高、更具挑战性的工作。
然而，令我震惊的是，检验医学的现状确实是一把“双刃剑”。
在我给美国临床病理学会会员的最后一封信中，我本人说道：“在患者护理中接受和领导新技术的应用以及与护理人员合作的告诫对于实验室人员和医生来说都同样重要。它可以带来令人兴奋的新职业选择。例如，我知道一些实验室人员正在担任医院感染控制从业人员 - 为什么不呢？他们在实验室的经验使他们成为出色的问题解决者，所有患者结果都来自测试一些实验室专业人员在重症监护室巡视，受到临床护理人员的欢迎。”
这些都是跳出框框思考的好例子。我相信这些角色不仅适合实验室专业人员担任，而且还提高了该专业在更广泛的医疗保健社区中的地位。
当技术熟练的专业人员选择通过进入医学院或进入工业界而离开时，实验室职业的真正损失就发生了。当同事做出旨在提升她或他的职业生涯的举动时，除了鼓励之外，很难有其他任何事情。人们不禁为他们感到自豪，因为他们受过良好的教育，并且是这些外部职位的优秀候选人。
这是一把双刃剑的另一面：对于每一个旨在最大限度地提高实验室专业人员的技能和知识的创新、创造性和挑战极限的策略，实验室都会随之失去拥有提供无与伦比的实验室医学质量所需技能的专业人员。
这些问题没有“灵丹妙药”解决方案。我希望有。我得出的结论是，我们能做的最好的事情就是继续进行对话——逐层剖析我们在实验室医学中面临的问题，并找到解决方案，从而更好地利用实验室人员的技能和才能，使他们能够留在这个行业。我们需要拥抱变革，因为它肯定会到来，病理学领域的领导者有责任进行未来思考，以便在快速发展的医疗保健领域中在实验室医学中开发新的机会，而不是输给其他领域。
而且，一段时间后，当我们实施这些想法时，我坚信，当我们回顾过去时，会发现它们中的每一个都已成为更大解决方案的一部分，该解决方案最终改变了实验室人员看待其工作的方式，改善了实验室医学的实践，并为所有美国人带来了更好的医疗保健系统。
我们鼓励读者回复 MedGenMed 编辑 George Lundberg 医学博士，仅供编辑参考或可能通过电子邮件发表：ten.epacsdem@grebdnulg
I totally agree with Laine Stewart's assessment of the state of laboratory professionals in today's healthcare environment.[1]
There are too few laboratorians for too many openings; their pay remains inappropriately low given the importance of their work; the “system” has somehow failed to appropriately challenge laboratory professionals so that their work remains exciting throughout their career, and, yes, too many leave the profession for better-paying, more challenging jobs.
I'm struck, however, at what a “double-edged sword” the current situation in laboratory medicine really is.
In one of my last messages to the membership of The American Society for Clinical Pathology, I, myself, said, “The admonition to embrace and lead the application of new technology and collaborate with caregivers in patient care is as relevant for laboratorians as it is for physicians. And it can lead to exciting new career options. For instance, I'm aware that some laboratorians are serving as hospital infection control practitioners – and why not? Their experience in the laboratory makes them great problem solvers, and all of the patient results come from testing in the laboratory. Some laboratory professionals are making rounds in intensive care units and are welcomed by clinical caregivers.”
These are great examples of thinking outside the box. I believe that such roles are not only appropriate for laboratory professionals to play, but they enhance the profession's standing in the wider healthcare community.
The real source of loss to the laboratory profession occurs when skilled professionals choose to leave by enrolling in medical school or making a move to industry. It's hard to be anything but encouraging when a colleague makes a move designed to enhance her or his career. One can't help but be proud of them because they are well educated and make excellent candidates for these outside positions.
It's the other edge of that 2-edged sword: For every innovative, creative, and envelope-pushing strategy to maximize the skills and knowledge of laboratory professionals, there's a concomitant loss to the laboratory of a professional with the very skills that are needed to provide unparalleled quality in laboratory medicine.
There's just no “silver bullet” solution to these problems. I wish that there were. I've concluded that the best thing that we can do is to continue to engage in dialogue – to peel apart, layer by layer, the problems that we face in laboratory medicine and discover solutions that result in making better use of the skills and talents of laboratorians so that they will remain in the profession. We need to embrace change as it will certainly come, and the leaders in pathology have a responsibility to think futuristically so that new opportunities in the rapidly evolving healthcare arena are developed in laboratory medicine and not lost to other areas.
And, after a while, as we implement these ideas, I'm firmly convinced that we'll look back and see that each of them has become a part of a larger solution that has, ultimately, changed the way that laboratorians see their work, improved the practice of laboratory medicine, and resulted in an even better system of healthcare for all Americans.
Readers are encouraged to respond to George Lundberg, MD, Editor of MedGenMed, for the editor's eye only or for possible publication via email: ten.epacsdem@grebdnulg