Correlation of cytotechnologists' parameters with their performance in rapid prescreening of papanicolaou smears

Cancer

Volumn 108, Issue 5, 2006, Pages 306-310

  Djemli, Amina ^a   Khetani, Karim ^a   Case, Bruce W ^a   Auger, Manon ^a,b  

^a MCGILL UNIVERSITY HEALTH CENTRE   (Canada)

^b MCGILL UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

Cytotechnologist; Gynecological cytology; Prescreening; Quality control; Rapid screening; Rescreening

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; ATYPICAL SQUAMOUS CELL OF UNDETERMINED SIGNIFICANCE; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; CYTOPATHOLOGY; CYTOTECHNOLOGIST; EXPERIENCE; FEMALE; GYNECOLOGIC CANCER; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; PAPANICOLAOU TEST; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY CONTROL; RESCREENING; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; SKILL; UTERINE CERVIX CYTOLOGY;

CERVICAL INTRAEPITHELIAL NEOPLASIA; FALSE NEGATIVE REACTIONS; FALSE POSITIVE REACTIONS; FEMALE; HUMANS; MASS SCREENING; OBSERVER VARIATION; QUALITY ASSURANCE, HEALTH CARE; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; UTERINE CERVICAL NEOPLASMS; VAGINAL SMEARS;

EID: 33750052550     PISSN: 0008543X     EISSN: 10970142     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/cncr.22166     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Melamed MR. Presidential address. Acta Cytol. 1973;17:285-288.
2. Melamed MR, Flehinger BJ. Reevaluation of quality assurance in the cytology laboratory. Acta Cytol. 1992;36:461-465.
3. Jordon SW. Great expectations: cytology provisions of CLIA'88 and the role of professional societies. Cytopathol Annu. 1992;235-247.
4. Baker A, Melcher D, Smith R. Role of re-screening of cervical smears in internal quality control. J Clin Pathol. 1995;48:1002-1004.
5. Renshaw AA. Rescreening in cervical cytology for quality control. When bad data is worse than no data or what works, what doesn't, and why. Clin Lab Med. 2003;23:695-708.
6. Krieger P, Naryshkin S. Random rescreening of cytologic smears: a practical and effective component of quality assurance programs in both large and small cytology laboratories. Acta Cytol. 1994;38:291-298.
7. Krieger PA, Cohen T, Naryshkin S. A practical guide to Papanicolaou smear rescreens: how many slides must be reevaluated to make a statistically valid assessment of screening performance? Cancer. 1998;84:130-137.
8. Lemay C, Meisels A. 100% Rapid (partial) rescreening for quality assurance. Acta Cytol. 1999;43:86-88.
9. Arbyn M, Schenck U. Detection of false negative Pap smears by rapid reviewing: a metaanalysis. Acta Cytol. 2000;44:949-957.
10. Diehl ARS, Prolla J. Rapid rescreening of cervical smears for internal quality control. Acta Cytol. 1998;42:949-953.
11. National Health Service Cervical Screening. Achievable standards, benchmarks for reporting and criteria for evaluating cervical cytology, 2nd ed. Sheffield, UK: NHSCSP Publication no. 1, 2000.
12. Shield PW, Cox C. The sensitivity of rapid (partial review) of cervical smears. Cytopathology. 1998;9:84-92.
13. Renshaw AA, Cronin JA, Minter LJ, et al. Performance characteristics of rapid (30 seconds) prescreening. Implications for calculating the false-negative rate and comparison with other quality assurance techniques. Am J Clin Pathol. 1999;111:517-522.
14. Brooke D, Dudding N, Sutton J. Rapid (partial) prescreening of cervical smears: the quality control method of choice? Cytopathology. 2002;13:191-199.
15. Smith J, Nicholas D, Boyd K, Deacon-Smith R. Rapid prescreening: a validated quality assurance measure in cervical cytology. Cytopathology. 2003;14:275-280.
16. Faraker CA, Boxer ME. Rapid review (partial rescreening) of cervical cytology. Four years experience and quality assurance implications. J Clin Pathol. 1996;49:587-591.
17. Faraker CA. Partial rescreening of all negative smears: an improved method of quality assurance in laboratories undertaking cervical screening. Cytopathology. 1993;4:47-50.
18. Dudding N, Hewer EM, Lancucki L, Rice S. Rapid screening: a comparative study. Cytopathology. 2001;12:235-248.
19. Djemli A, Khetani K, Auger M. Rapid prescreening of Pap smears: a practical and efficient quality control strategy. Cancer (Cancer Cytopathol). 2006)108:21-26.
20. Solomon D, Nayar R. The Bethesda System for reporting cervical cytology. Definitions, criteria, and explanatory notes, 2nd ed. New York: Springer, 2004.
21. Farell DJ, Bilkhu S, Gibson LM, Cummings L, Wadehra V. Rapid screening of cervical smears as a method of internal quality control. For how long should we rescreen? Acta Cytol. 1997;41:251-260.
22. Faraker CA. Rapid review. Cytopathology. 1998;9:71-76.
23. Renshaw AA, Bellerose B, DiNisio SA, Minter LJ, Lee KR. False negative rate of cervical cytologic smear screening as determined by rapid rescreening. Acta Cytol. 1999;43:344-350.
24. Johnson SJ, Hair T, Gibson L, Ridley B, Wadehra V. An assessment of partial rescreening as an internal quality control method for cervical smears. Cytopathology. 1995;6:376-387.
25. Rowe LR, Marshall CJ, Bentz JS. One hundred percent thorough quality control rescreening of liquid-based monolayers in cervicovaginal cytopathology. Cancer (Cancer Cytopathol). 2002;96:325-329.