Rapid prescreening in gynecologic cytology: A more efficient quality assurance method

Cancer Cytopathology

Volumn 119, Issue 6, 2011, Pages 357-360

  Auger, Manon ^a  

^a MCGILL UNIVERSITY HEALTH CENTRE   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ABNORMAL LABORATORY RESULT; CANCER SCREENING; FALSE NEGATIVE RESULT; FEMALE GENITAL TRACT CYTOLOGY; PAPANICOLAOU TEST; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY CONTROL; RAPID PRESCREENING; RAPID RESCREENING; REVIEW; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; FEMALE; HUMAN; MASS SCREENING; METHODOLOGY; NOTE; UTERINE CERVIX DISEASE; UTERINE CERVIX TUMOR; VAGINA SMEAR;

FEMALE; HUMANS; MASS SCREENING; UTERINE CERVICAL DISEASES; UTERINE CERVICAL NEOPLASMS; VAGINAL SMEARS;

EID: 84857097759     PISSN: None     EISSN: 19346638     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/cncy.20189     Document Type: Review

References (20)

1. Tavares SBN, Alves de Sousa NL, Manrique EJC, Pinheiro de Albuquerque ZB, Zeferino LC, Amaral RG. Improvement in the routine screening of cervical smears: a study using rapid prescreening and 100% rapid review as internal quality control methods. Cancer Cytopathol. 2011;119:367-376.
2. Renshaw AA, Lezon KM, Wilbur DC. The human falsenegative rate of rescreening Pap tests. Measured in a twoarm prospective clinical trial. Cancer Cytopathol. 2001;93: 106-110.
3. Dudding N. Rapid rescreen: a viable alternative to 1:10? Diagn Cytopathol. 2001;24:219-221.
4. Amaral RG, Zeferino LC, Hardy E, Westin MC, Martinez EZ, Montemor EB. Quality assurance in cervical smears: 100% rapid rescreening vs. 10% random rescreening. Acta Cytol. 2005;49:244-248.
5. Djemli A, Khetani K, Auger M. Rapid prescreening of Papanicolaou smears. A practical and efficient quality control strategy. Cancer Cytopathol. 2006;108:21-26.
6. Tavares SB, Alves de Sousa NL, Manrique EJ, Pinheiro de Albuquerque ZB, Zeferino LC, Amaral RG. Comparison of the performance of rapid prescreening, 10% random review, and clinical risk criteria as methods of internal quality control in cervical cytopathology. Cancer Cytopathol. 2008;114:165-170.
7. Faraker CA, Boxer ME. Rapid review (partial rescreening) of cervical cytology: Four years experience and quality assurance implications. J Clin Pathol. 1997;50:87.
8. Arbyn M, Schenck U. Detection of false-negative Pap smears by rapid rescreening. A metaanalysis. Acta Cytol. 2000;44:949-957.
9. Arbyn M, Schenck U, Ellison E, Hanselaar A. Metaanalysis of the accuracy of rapid prescreening relative to full screening of pap smears. Cancer. 2003;99:9-16.
10. Renshaw AA, Bellerose B, DiNisco SA, Minter LJ, Lee KR. False negative rate of cervical cytologic smear screening as determined by rapid rescreening. Acta Cytol. 1999;43:344-350.
11. Renshaw AA, Cronin JA, Minter LJ, Whitman T, Jiroutek M, Cibas ES. Performance characteristics of rapid (30 seconds) prescreening: implications for calculating the falsenegative rate and comparison with other quality assurance techniques. Am J Clin Pathol. 1999;111:517-522.
12. Baker A, Melcher DH. Rapid cervical cytology screening. Cytopathology. 1991;2:299-301.
13. Farell DJ, Bilku 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.
14. Brimo F, Renshaw AA, Deschenes M, Charbonneau M, Auger M. Improvement in the routine screening performance of cytotechnologists over time: a study using rapid prescreening. Cancer Cytopathol. 2009;117:311-317.
15. Dudding N, Renshaw AA, Ellis K. Rapid Pre-screening is more sensitive in liquid-based cytology than in conventional smears. Acta Cytol. 2011;55:54-56.
16. Wilgenbusch H, Mueller G, Neal M, Renshaw AA. Rapid prescreening is as effective at reducing screening error as postscreening with the FocalPoint automated screening device. Diagn Cytopathol 2010 [Epub ahead of print].
17. Mueller G, Wilgenbusch H, Neal M, Renshaw A. Comparison of rapid prescreening and automated FocalPoint primary screening for abnormal Gyn detection. Cancer Cytopathol. 2010;118(Suppl):393.
18. Deschenes M, Renshaw AA, Auger M. Measuring the significance of workload on performance of cytotechnologists in gynecologic cytology. A study using rapid prescreening. Cancer Cytopathol. 2008;114:149-154.
19. Djemli A, Khetani K, Case BW, Auger M. Correlation of cytotechnologists' parameters with their performance in rapid prescreening of Papanicolaou smears. Cancer Cytopathol. 2006;108:306-310.
20. Dudding N, Renshaw AA, Ellis K. Improved sensitivity over time with rapid prescreening in gynecologic cytology. Diagn Cytopathol. 2011;39:428-430.