Advocacy News

• CAP members, access new pathology leaders survey results
• Host a lab tour for your elected officials
• CAP, blood community block state push for directed blood mandates
• Virginia’s EHR law: 72-hour test result delay
• South Carolina genetic data bill opposed by CAP fails to advance
• CMS proposes 2027 hospital payment updates

New for CAP members: The 2025 CAP Practice Leader Survey Report is now available, offering data driven insights into today’s pathology practice landscape.

The impact: The biennial report showcases trends and strengthens CAP advocacy by providing evidence to guide policy priorities.

• Members gain a clearer view of training pathways  , experience levels, and hiring trends across pathology practices.

What’s inside: The report examines practice operations, staffing, economics, digital pathology adoption, and market pressures. Key findings include:

• 71% of practices report a negative impact from decreased reimbursement over the past two years.

Among those affected:

• 26% report increased turnaround time.
• 26% report reduced non-physician laboratory staffing.
• 18% report reduced pathologist staffing.

Looking ahead:

• Additional insights will be shared at the House of Delegates & Pathologists Leadership Summit 2026, where findings will support Capitol Hill advocacy.
• The 2026 CAP Practice Characteristics Survey launches this summer to capture deeper practice‑level data.

Go deeper: Hear more from a recent CAP newscast featuring W. Stephen Black‑Shaffer, MD, FCAP, and Sarah M. Eakin, MD, FCAP, as they discuss reimbursement cuts, workforce shifts, and emerging hiring trends. 

Show your impact: Inviting policymakers into your laboratory is one of the most effective ways to demonstrate how pathology drives patient care—and why informed decision‑making matters.

Why it works: Lab tours help elected officials better understand the role of pathologists, supporting advocacy efforts and shaping decisions that influence patient access, quality, and innovation.

What they’re saying: Vijaya B. Reddy, MD, MBA, FCAP, who recently hosted a lab tour with Rep. Sean Casten (IL‑06), shared in a CAP newscast that seeing the lab firsthand offered far more context than a brief meeting.

“I think this tour actually educated him much more than what I would have accomplished in a five- or 15-minute visit…there’s no better way to show them my world than bringing them actually to my world, and I think that was very helpful,” said Dr. Reddy in a CAP newscast.

The ask: Consider hosting a lab tour for your local, state, or federal representatives to share your expertise and elevate the role of pathology in your community.

Next steps:

• Identify which elected officials you’d like to invite.
• Work with your institution to select a date and confirm logistics.
• Use the visit to highlight how your lab supports access, quality, and innovation.

Need support? Email Grassroots Manager Annie McKinney at amckinn@cap.org for help in scheduling a lab tour with your member of Congress.

The CAP, the Association for the Advancement of Blood & Biotherapies, the blood bank community, and state pathology societies have joined forces this year to oppose a wave of state bills mandating directed and autologous blood donations.

The big picture: Nine states considered legislation requiring hospitals and blood banks to provide directed or autologous donations.

• Arizona, Florida, Idaho, Illinois, Iowa, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Tennessee, and Utah were among those considering the measures.
• Most proposals failed; Idaho was the only state to enact legislation, passing House Bill 528.
• Many of the bills included exceptions for emergencies or cases where directed or autologous blood could harm patients.

What we're saying: The CAP urged Idaho Governor Brad Little to veto HB 528 in a detailed veto request letter.

“Legislative proposals like House Bill 528, mandating access to autologous or direct blood donations, threaten to reduce blood availability, increase costs, introduce waste, and delay life-saving care—particularly for products like platelets, where timely availability is vital,” wrote CAP President Qihui "Jim" Zhai, MD, FCAP.

The impact: The CAP’s new policy position, adopted in July 2025, aligns pathologists with the blood banking community in opposing these mandates and protecting the community blood supply.

• The CAP emphasized that the community blood supply must remain the primary focus of donor collection.
• Less than 0.04% of transfusions each year involve autologous or directed blood.
• A mandated shift could overwhelm blood centers and jeopardize timely patient care.

Next steps: The CAP will continue working with national and state partners to oppose mandated autologous and directed blood donation legislation and to safeguard continued access to safe, timely transfusion care for all patients.

Virginia will now permit a brief delay in releasing sensitive test results in electronic health records (EHRs) after a bill supported by the Virginia Society for Pathology and the CAP has become law.

• Gov. Abigail Spanberger signed HB 973 on April 6.

The impact: Virginia clinicians now have a 72-hour window for releasing certain high-stakes results in EHRs.

• Brief delays allow clinicians to contact patients before portal release.
• The law aligns with federal rules, with exceptions for sensitive findings.

Key provisions: While the bill aligns with prohibitions on "information blocking," it allows a 72-hour delay for:

• Pathology and radiology reports with a reasonable likelihood of showing malignancy.
• Tests revealing genetic markers.

Yes, but: Information will be released earlier by patient consent, when an EHR system can’t withhold results selectively, or when early release benefits the patient. 

• Another provision also shields entities from liability for compliance.

The big picture: The new law addresses concerns that patients may see potential cancer or genetic findings online before a doctor’s explanation.

• The law preserves quick access to most results while allowing additional coordination for sensitive reports.

Go deeper: Read the CAP's earlier coverage.

Legislation in South Carolina that would have given patients ownership of their genetic information failed to advance this session.

• Senate Bill 731 would have redefined how genetic data is treated in the state. The CAP and the South Carolina Society of Pathologists (SCSP) opposed the bill in a joint letter.

The impact: Pathologists warned the bill could have limited patient access to advanced diagnostic testing and targeted therapies.

• CAP and SCSP stressed that genetic analysis is now central to precision medicine, especially in cancer care and other serious conditions.
• "An array of targeted therapies based on biomarkers is now available and has dramatically improved health outcomes for South Carolina patients," the groups wrote.

What we’re saying: The SCSP also urged lawmakers to preserve pathologists’ ability to use and share genetic information under existing federal privacy rules.

"Our legal authority to analyze, store and share this information and our patient specimens, in compliance with HIPAA and related regulations (42 C.F.R. parts 160 and 164), should be expressly exempted under this legislation," SCSP stated.

The bottom line: The South Carolina legislature adjourned without taking action on SB 731, so the bill will not move forward this session.

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) released its 2027 Hospital Inpatient and Long-term Care Hospital payment systems proposed rule on April 10.

The impact: CMS proposes a 2.4% increase in hospital inpatient payment rates, with overall hospital payments expected to rise by about $1.4 billion.

The details:

• The rule updates payment rates for acute care and long-term care hospitals.
• Hospital quality programs remain focused on broad measures like mortality rates.
• No pathology-specific quality measures are included or proposed.

What’s next:

• CMS continues to expand alternative payment models, including an episode-based approach for joint replacement care.
• While the proposal does not directly affect pathology, we are monitoring its development and potential downstream impact.