Whither pathology in medical education?

To the Editor: I was most interested in Weedon’s editorial on the teaching of pathology in the present medical curriculum.1 I have lamented the demise of anatomy teaching in undergraduate courses and regret that pathology is going the same way. In my view, anatomy, physiology and pathology are fundamental to understanding the disease process. They enable physical symptoms and signs to be interpreted in a logical manner so that a provisional diagnosis can be made. Once this has been done, it is reasonable to progress to ancillary aids to confirm or refute the original diagnosis.

When doing operative surgery I used to ask my assistants questions, usually on anatomical features that were being exposed. Many, including some who possessed the primary surgical fellowship, could not identify simple structures such as the sartorius muscle when the popliteal artery was being exposed. Questions on structures in the neck were even less well answered.

The present medical curriculum is directed towards problem-solving methods and the patient’s condition in relation to the environment and other conditions. But how much thought goes into the mechanism of disease and understanding physical findings? I consider medicine and surgery to be applied pathology, and therefore knowledge of the basic facts is essential.

Future doctors may be proficient in the general and social aspects of medicine, but it would seem that their knowledge of the basic facts of anatomy, physiology and pathology and their understanding of the mechanism of disease may be no better than that of a “medicine man”.