Cervical smear adequacy: Cellularity references were found to increase both interobserver agreement and unsatisfactory rate

Cytopathology

Volumn 20, Issue 3, 2009, Pages 161-168

  Moore, David ^a,b   Pugh Cain, D ^b   Walker, T ^c  

^a QUEEN ELIZABETH II HEALTH SCIENCES CENTRE   (Canada)

^b NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL CANADA   (Canada)

^c UNIVERSITY OF BALLARAT   (Australia)

Author keywords

Cellularity reference images; Conventional cervical smear; Interobserver variation; Squamous cellularity adequacy; The Bethesda System (TBS) 2001

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CELL STRUCTURE; CLINICAL ASSESSMENT; CYTOTECHNOLOGISTS; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; IMAGE QUALITY; KAPPA STATISTICS; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; OBSERVER VARIATION; PATHOLOGIST; PRETEST POSTTEST DESIGN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; UTERINE CERVIX CYTOLOGY;

CERVICAL INTRAEPITHELIAL NEOPLASIA; FEMALE; HUMANS; OBSERVER VARIATION; PRECANCEROUS CONDITIONS; QUALITY CONTROL; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; UTERINE CERVICAL NEOPLASMS; VAGINAL SMEARS;

EID: 65649090243     PISSN: 09565507     EISSN: 13652303     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2303.2008.00605.x     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Nielsen ML, Davey DD, Kline TS. Specimen adequacy evaluation in gynecologic cytopathology current laboratory practice in the College of American Pathologists interlaboratory comparison program and the tentative guidelines for future practice. Diagn Cytopathol 1993 9 : 394 403. (Pubitemid 23239751)
2. Renshaw AA, Friedman MM, Rahemtulla A et al. Accuracy and reproducibility of estimating the adequacy of the squamous component of cervicovaginal smears. Am J Clin Pathol 1999 111 : 38 42. (Pubitemid 29024964)
3. Fidda N, Miron J, Rodgers WH, Rader A. Impact of the new Bethesda System 2001 on specimen adequacy of conventional cervicovaginal smears. Diagn Cytopathol 2004 30 : 235 9. (Pubitemid 38420239)
4. Baadrup U, Bishop JW, Bonfiglio TA et al. Sampling, sampling errors and specimen preparation. Acta Cytol 2000 44 : 944 8.
5. Ciatto S, Cariaggi MP, Minuti AP et al. Interlaboratory reproducibility in reporting inadequate cervical smears - a multicenter, multinational study. Cytopathology 1996 7 : 386 90. (Pubitemid 26396389)
6. McGoogan E, Colgan TJ, Ramzy I et al. Cell preparation methods and criteria for sample adequacy: International Academy of Cytology task force summary: diagnostic cytology towards the 21st century: an international expert conference and tutorial. Acta Cytol 1998 42 : 25 32.
7. Wilson JD, French R, Branch T, Sutton J. Inadequate cervical cytology - the need to audit individual smear taker's inadequate rates. Cytopathology 1999 10 : 107 11. (Pubitemid 29166649)
8. Davey D. Cervical cytology classification and the Bethesda System. Cancer J 2003 9 : 327 34. (Pubitemid 44403486)
9. Ransdell JS, Davey DD, Zaleski S. Clinicopathological correlation of the unsatisfactory Papanicolaou smear. Cancer 1997 81 : 139 43. (Pubitemid 28275303)
10. Davey DD, Woodhouse S, Styer P, Stastny J, Mody D. Atypical epithelial cells and specimen adequacy: Current laboratory practices of participants in the College of American Pathologists interlaboratory comparison program in cervicovaginal cytology. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2000 124 : 203 11. (Pubitemid 30090603)
11. Solomon D, Nayar R. (eds.) Specimen adequacy. In : The Bethesda System for Reporting Cervical Cytology. Definitions, Criteria, and Explanatory Notes, 2nd edn. New York : Springer-Verlag, 2004 : pp. 1 21.
12. Birdsong GG. Pap smear adequacy: is our understanding satisfactory or limited? Diagn Cytopathol 2000 242 : 79 81.
13. The Trent Gynecological Pathology Quality Assurance Group. Inadequate cervical smears: results of an educational slide exchange scheme. Cytopathology 1999 10 : 16 24. (Pubitemid 29071132)
14. Migliore G, Rossi E, Aldovini A. Variation in the assessment of adequacy in cervical smears. Cytopathology 2001 12 : 377 82. (Pubitemid 35300618)
15. Spires S, Banks E, Weeks J, Banks H, Davey D. Assessment of cervicovaginal smear adequacy. Am J Clin Pathol 1994 102 : 354 9.
16. Sheffield MV, Simsir A, Talley L. Interobserver variability in assessing adequacy of the squamous component in conventional cervicovaginal smears. Am J Clin Pathol 2003 119 : 367 73. (Pubitemid 37047859)
17. Montanari G, Confortini M, Bellomi A. Assessment of specimen adequacy reproducibility: an Italian experience. Diagn Cytopathol 2002 28 : 224 6.
18. Cohen J. A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educ Psychol Meas 1960 20 : 37 46.
19. Davy DD, Austin RM, Birdsong G. ASCCP patient management guidelines: Pap test specimen adequacy and quality indicators. Am J Clin Pathol 2002 118 : 714 8.
20. Colgan TJ. Pap test results: responding to Bethesda System results. Can Fam Physician 2001 47 : 1425 30. (Pubitemid 33611771)
21. Solomon D, Davey D, Kurman R. The 2001 Bethesda System terminology for reporting results in cervical cytology. JAMA 2002 287 : 2114 9. (Pubitemid 34437346)
22. Luff RD, Berek JS, Bibbo M. The Bethesda System for reporting cervical/vaginal cytologic diagnoses. Acta Cytol 1993 37 : 115 24. (Pubitemid 23109641)