Summary of the 2006 College of American Pathologists Gynecologic Cytology Proficiency Testing Program

Archives of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine

Volumn 132, Issue 5, 2008, Pages 788-794

  Bentz, Joel S ^a   Hughes, Jonathan H ^a,b   Fatheree, Lisa A ^a,c   Schwartz, Mary R ^a,d   Soures, Rhona J ^c   Wilbur, David C ^a,e  

^a UNIVERSITY OF UTAH SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b Laboratory Med Consultants Ltd   (United States)

^c Molecular Pathology Division   (United States)

^d HOUSTON METHODIST HOSPITAL   (United States)

^e MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACCREDITATION; ARTICLE; CLINICAL PRACTICE; CYTOLOGY; EDUCATION PROGRAM; GYNECOLOGICAL EXAMINATION; HUMAN; MEDICAL PRACTICE; MENTAL COMPLIANCE; PATHOLOGIST; PATHOLOGY; PHYSICIAN; SCREENING; SKILL;

CLINICAL COMPETENCE; CYTODIAGNOSIS; EDUCATIONAL MEASUREMENT; FEMALE; HUMANS; PATHOLOGY, SURGICAL; QUALITY ASSURANCE, HEALTH CARE; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SOCIETIES, MEDICAL; VAGINAL SMEARS;

EID: 43049099969     PISSN: 00039985     EISSN: 15432165     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments of 1988 Final Rule, 42 USC §263a(f)(4)(B)(iv) §353(f)(4)(B)(iv) of the Public Health Service Act, 57 Federal Register 7001-7186 (1992).
2. Cytopathology Education and Technology Consortium. Scientific issues related to the cytology proficiency testing regulations. Acta Cytol. 2006;50:1910-197.
3. Frable WJ. Proficiency testing for cytologists: where science, biology and government regulations collide. Cancer (Cancer Cytopathol). 2005;105:119-123.
4. Woodhouse SL, Schulte MA, Stastny JF. Proficient or deficient: on the razors edge: establishing validity in cytology proficiency testing. Diag Cytopathol. 1999; 20(5):255-256.
5. Austin RM. Can regulatory proficiency testing by the cytobureaucracy decrease both false negatives and cervical cancer deaths? Diagn Cytopathol. 1994; 11(2):109-112.
6. Valente PT. Government mandated cytology proficiency testing: time for reality testing. Diagn Cytopathol. 1994;10(2):105-106.
7. Nagy GK, Newton LE. Cytopathology proficiency testing: where do we go from here? Diagn Cytopathol. 2006;34(4):257-264.
8. Collins DN, Patacsil DP. Proficiency testing in cytology in New York: analysis of a 14-year state program. Acta Cytol. 1986;30:633-642.
9. Smith M, Shalkham JE, Inhorn SL. Wisconsin cytology proficiency testing program: results of voluntary testing in 1994. Acta Cytol. 1997;41:1681-1689.
10. DeBoy JM, Jarboe BR. Government-mandated cytology proficiency testing: practical, equitable, and defensible standards. QRB Qual Rev Bull. 1991;17(5): 152-161.
11. Thompson DW, Wood DE, Lipa M, Miyazaki JH, Khatri N. Gynecologic cytology from the perspective of the laboratory proficiency testing program, Ontario, Canada. Acta Cytol. 1995;39:207-221.
12. Gifford C, Green J, Coleman DV. Evaluation of proficiency testing as a method of accessing competence to screen cervical smears. Cytopathology. 1997; 8:96-102.
13. Nielsen ML. Cytopathology interlaboratory improvement programs of the College of American Pathologists: Laboratory Accreditation Program (CAP LAP) and performance improvement program in cervicovaginal cytology (CAP PAP). Arch Pathol Lab Med. 1997;121:256-259.
14. Renshaw AA, Wang E, Mody DR, Wilbur DC, Davey DD, Colgan TJ, for the Cytopathology Resource Committee, College of American Pathologists. Measuring the significance of field validation in the College of American Pathologists Interlaboratory Comparison Program in Cervicovaginal Cytology: how good are the experts? Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2005;129:609-613.
15. Renshaw AA, Walsh MK, Blond B, Moriarty AT, Mody DR, Colgan TJ, for the Cytopathology Resource Committee, College of American Pathologists. Robustness of validation criteria in the College of American Pathologists Interlaboratory Comparison Program in Cervicovaginal Cytology. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2006;130:1119-1122.
16. Stoler MH, Schiffman M. Interobserver reproducibility of cervical cytologic and histologic interpretations: realistic estimates from ASCUS-LSIL Triage Study. JAMA. 2001;285:1500-1505.
17. Woodhouse SL, Stasny JF, Styer PE, Kennedy M, Praestgaard AH, Davey DD. Interobserver variability in subclassification of squamous intraepithelial lesion: results of the College of American Pathologists Interlaboratory Comparison Program in Cervicovaginal Cytology. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 1999;123:1079-1084.
18. Wright TC Jr, Massad LS, Dunton CJ, Spitzer M, Wilkinson EJ, Solomon D, 2006 American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology-sponsored Consensus Conference. 2006 consensus guidelines for the management of women with abnormal cervical cancer screening tests. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2007;197: 346-355.
19. Centers of Medicare and Medicaid Services. Final 2005 National Cytology Proficiency Testing Results. Available at: http://www.cms.hhs.gov/CLIA/ downloads/2005FinalTestingResults080906MDMIME.pdf. Accessed October 2, 2007.
20. Wiseman C. National Cytology Proficiency Testing Update. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, February 8, 2006. Available at: http:// wwwn.cdc.gov/cliac/pdf/addenda/cliac0206/addendumF.pdf. Accessed February 6, 2008.
21. Young NA, Moriarty AT, Walsh MK, Wang E, Wilbur DC. The potential for failure in gynecologic regulatory proficiency testing with current slide validation criteria. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2006;130:1114-1118.