Intraobserver and interobserver variability in the quality assessment of cervical smears.
ABSTRACT Intraobserver and interobserver variability in assessing the quality of cervical smears, as measured by the presence or absence of endocervical columnar cells and squamous metaplastic cells, was evaluated. In total, 180 cervical smears representing the most important cytologic diagnoses were anonymously rescreened twice by 19 observers with an interval of six months. An absence of endocervical columnar cells was proven to correlate with a high percentage of false-negative diagnoses. Intraobserver agreement on the presence or absence of endocervical columnar cells was 85.7% between the two screenings. A predictive value of 57.7% was found for a negative scoring (absence of these cells) while the predictive value of a positive scoring (presence of endocervical cells) was 87.3%. Of the observer scorings, 83.9% concurred with the final diagnosis; there was no significant correlation between that concurrence and the number of years of experience in cytopathology of the observer. For squamous and squamous metaplastic cells in the cervical smear the predictive value of a negative scoring (absence) was only 20.6%. Compared to the final diagnosis, 69.5% of these scorings matched. A significant and relatively high correlation with the experience of the observer was found for the scoring for the presence of metaplastic cells. Even though the predictive values of these quality scorings were relatively low a significantly higher risk for false diagnoses was established when negative scorings were given. It is therefore advisable to have smears with negative scorings for endocervical columnar cells and squamous metaplastic cells always rescreened by another observer.
- SourceAvailable from: Cecilia M Roteli-Martins[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: T here is no doubt that organized screening programs are effective in reducing the incidence and Slide exchange and diagnosis comparison are the core components of the interlaboratory QC schemes to maintain and check diagnostic approach and establish standard consensus criteria through consensus opinion.
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Objectives. To provide management guidelines according to Pap test specimen adequacy based on literature review and expert opinion. Methods. A task force named by the American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology conducted a literature review and discussed appropriate management. The steering committee of the American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology and other experts reviewed the guidelines. Results. The guidelines recommend a repeat Pap test in 12 months for most women who are undergoing routine annual/biennial screening if the current Pap test is negative but either lacks an endocervical/transformation zone component or is partially obscured. Indications for considering an earlier repeat are also provided. The preferred management for unsatisfactory Pap tests is a repeat Pap test within a short interval of 2 to 4 months. Conclusions. The management guidelines will help promote optimal and uniform follow-up of women's Pap tests, according to Pap test specimen adequacy.Journal of Lower Genital Tract Disease 06/2002; 6(3):195-199. · 1.21 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The French Society of Clinical Cytology is conducting a study to compare the cost-effectiveness of monolayers and human papillomavirus (HPV) testing with that of conventional Papanicolaou (Pap) smears for cervical cancer screening. The protocol of this study is presented. It includes 3,000 women who will be evaluated by the three methods (conventional Pap smears, or monolayers with or without HPV testing) and by the reference method: colposcopy followed, in cases with abnormalities, by cervical biopsy. Efficacy or performance of the methods will be compared on the basis of sensitivity. Cost comparisons and cost-effectiveness modeling will be based on the costs associated with methods themselves and also the costs of “false positives.” This will require specific collection of data concerning the costs of the three methods, as these costs have not previously been accurately documented. Patient recruiting and data collection started in September 1999 and will be complete in June 2000. The first results are expected to be available in spring 2001. Diagn. Cytopathol. 24:412–420, 2001. © 2001 Wiley-Liss, Inc.Diagnostic Cytopathology 05/2001; 24(6):412 - 420. · 1.49 Impact Factor