Veterinary students' accuracy, confidence, and time required to diagnose bacterial sepsis in fluid cytology samples was evaluated using two different slide preparation methods: direct smears and cytocentrifuged concentrated preparations. We hypothesized veterinary students would diagnose fluids as septic on concentrated preparations more accurately and quickly than on direct smears. Thirty third- and fourth-year students who had previously participated in a clinical pathology course completed a survey regarding general cytology experience and reviewed 40 randomized Romanowsky-stained slides via microscopy. Slides consisted of 10 septic and 10 non-septic samples with matched direct and concentrated slides, prepared from fluids from dogs, cats, and a horse. Participants' slide evaluation time, diagnosis, confidence, and slide photographs of areas considered septic were recorded. No difference in diagnostic accuracy between direct and concentrated samples was identified (area under the curve: 57% for both preparations, p = 0.77), although students agreed with pathologist-determined diagnoses more often when viewing concentrated samples (M = 63%, SD = 11% for concentrated; M = 56%, SD = 21% for direct, p = .012). A positive relationship existed between accuracy of diagnosis (R2 = .59) and senior status (p = .002), comfort interpreting cytology slides (p < .03), and if the student had taken the senior pathology rotation (p = .02). Only 38% (121/319) of participant photographs correctly identified sepsis. Under experimental conditions, concentrated preparations did not increase the accuracy of veterinary students' bacterial sepsis diagnosis; however, since accuracy did increase with cytology experience and comfort level, additional pre-clinical and clinical cytology training may benefit students before entering practice.
Keywords: assessment; clinical pathology; competency; cytologic evaluation; diagnostic laboratory; laboratory medicine; sepsis.