Assuring the quality of quality assurance

Clarke, Joanne M.; Thurloe, Julia K.; Bowditch, Ron C.; Roberts, J. M.

doi:10.1002/cncr.23640

Cited by 8 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the second, histopathology results were abnormal in 21% of cases of CIN1/+ and in 12% of cases of CIN2/+ [26,27]. The performance of RR-100% in the studies that took histopathology results into consideration ranged from 25 to 76.9% for CIN1/+ and 13.1 to 31.6% for CIN2/+ [14,28,29,30]. In this same study, an improvement was found in the performance of RS and consequently in the quality of the cytopathological diagnosis when the IQC methods were used.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Internal Quality Control for Cervical Cytopathology: Comparison of Potential False-Negatives Detected at Rapid Prescreening and at 100% Rapid Review

Tavares¹,

Souza²,

Manrique³

et al. 2014

Acta Cytologica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To evaluate the performance of rapid prescreening (RPS) and 100% rapid review (RR-100%) as internal quality control (IQC) methods assessed by outcome at colposcopy, histopathology and repeat cytopathology for cases with false-negative results on cervical cytopathology at routine screening (RS). Study Design: Out of 12,208 cytology smears analyzed, 900 were abnormal. Of these, 656 were identified at RS, and 244 were false-negative, with 90.2% identified at RPS and 57.4% at RR-100%. Of the 900 abnormal cases, 436 were submitted for additional testing. Results: Of the 244 women with cytopathological abnormalities identified only by the IQC methods, 114 had supplementary examinations: 35 were submitted for colposcopy, 22 for biopsy and 99 for repeat cytopathology. The sensitivity of RPS for the detection of abnormalities identified on colposcopy, histopathology and repeat cytopathology was 87.5% (95% CI 67.6-97.3), 82.4% (95% CI 56.6-96.2) and 95.7% (95% CI 85.2-99.5), respectively. The sensitivity of RR-100% was 54.2% (95% CI 32.8-74.4), 52.9% (95% CI 27.8-77.0) and 47.8% (95% CI 32.9-63.1), respectively. RPS was more sensitive than RR-100% when compared to the findings on colposcopy (p = 0.011) and repeat cytopathology (p = 0.000). When compared to colposcopy, histopathology and repeat cytopathology, the sensitivity of RS was 83.2% (95% CI 76.1-88.9), 85.7% (95% CI 78.1-91.5) and 73.3% (95% CI 66.0-79.7), respectively. Conclusion: RPS performed better than RR-100% when compared to the results of colposcopy and repeat cytopathology.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Internal Quality Control for Cervical Cytopathology: Comparison of Potential False-Negatives Detected at Rapid Prescreening and at 100% Rapid Review

Tavares¹,

Souza²,

Manrique³

et al. 2014

Acta Cytologica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Improvement in the routine screening of cervical smears

Tavares

Sousa

Manrique

et al. 2011

Cancer Cytopathology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Pap smears with glandular cell abnormalities: Are they detected by rapid prescreening?

Kanber

Charbonneau

Auger

2015

Cancer Cytopathology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND: Rapid prescreening (RPS) is one of the quality assurance (QA) methods used in gynecologic cytology.The efficacy of RPS has been previously studied but mostly with respect to squamous lesions; in fact, there has been no study so far specifically looking at the sensitivity of RPS for detecting glandular cell abnormalities. METHODS: A total of 80,565 Papanicolaou (Pap) smears underwent RPS during a 25-month period. A sample was designated as "review for abnormality" (R) if any abnormal cells (at the threshold of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance/atypical glandular cells [AGC]) were thought to be present or was designated as negative (N) if none were detected. Each sample then underwent full screening (FS) and was designated as either R or N and also given a cytologic interpretation. RESULTS:The final cytologic interpretation was a glandular cell abnormality ( AGC) in 107 samples (0.13%); 39 of these (36.4%) were flagged as R on RPS. Twenty-four patients (33.8%) out of 71 who had histologic follow-up were found to harbor a high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion or carcinoma; 13 of those 24 Pap smears (54.2%) had been flagged as R on RPS. Notably, 11 AGC cases were picked up by RPS only and not by FS and represented false-negative cases; 2 of these showed endometrial adenocarcinoma on histologic follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Pap smears with glandular cell abnormalities are often flagged as abnormal by RPS, and this results in a sensitivity of 36.4% (at the AGC threshold).Most importantly, some cases of AGC are detected on Pap smears by RPS only, and this demonstrates that RPS is a valuable QA method. Cancer (Cancer Cytopathol) 2015;123:739-44.

show abstract

Assuring the quality of quality assurance

Cited by 8 publications

References 17 publications

Internal Quality Control for Cervical Cytopathology: Comparison of Potential False-Negatives Detected at Rapid Prescreening and at 100% Rapid Review

Internal Quality Control for Cervical Cytopathology: Comparison of Potential False-Negatives Detected at Rapid Prescreening and at 100% Rapid Review

Improvement in the routine screening of cervical smears

Pap smears with glandular cell abnormalities: Are they detected by rapid prescreening?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About