Automated screening versus manual screening: A comparison of the ThinPrep® imaging system and manual screening in a time study

Schledermann, Doris; Hyldebrandt, C T Tina; Ejersbo, C T Dorthe; Hoelund, B.

doi:10.1002/dc.20640

Cited by 35 publications

(54 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…14 Studies published since, which have evaluated the cost and productivity implications associated with using the ThinPrep Imaging System and BD FocalPoint GS Imaging system, have suggested that automation results in both increased productivity and increased costs. In all studies the authors found that automation resulted in at least a 50% 25,26,29 increase in productivity, with the biggest increase reported being 56%. 32 A study based in Italy which estimated the costs associated with automated screening concluded that similar costs to manual screening could be achieved only if 60,000 samples per year were processed by the AutoPap Primary Screening System (now BD FocalPoint GS Imaging System) with a 30% NFR rate.…”

Section: Productivity and Cost-effectivenessmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…In the manual-only arm the FMR is by definition equivalent to the MR. Comparison between manual and automated readings in the paired arm The effect of checking on serial readings is shown in Tables [20][21][22][23][24][25][26]. When the MR1 was compared with the FMR, a large proportion of low grades (29.5%) were downgraded to negative.…”

Section: Comparison Between Manual Readings In Manual-only Armmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

MAVARIC – a comparison of automation-assisted and manual cervical screening: a randomised controlled trial

Kitchener

Blanks²,

Cubie³

et al. 2011

Health Technol Assess

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An electronic version of this title, in Adobe Acrobat format, is available for downloading free of charge for personal use from the HTA website (www.hta.ac.uk). A fully searchable DVD is also available (see below).Printed copies of HTA journal series issues cost £20 each (post and packing free in the UK) to both public and private sector purchasers from our despatch agents.Non-UK purchasers will have to pay a small fee for post and packing. For European countries the cost is £2 per issue and for the rest of the world £3 per issue. How to order:-fax (with credit card details) -post (with credit card details or cheque) -phone during office hours (credit card only).Additionally the HTA website allows you to either print out your order or download a blank order form. Contact details are as follows:Synergie UK (HTA Department) Digital House, The Loddon Centre Wade Road Basingstoke Hants RG24 8QW Email: orders@hta.ac.uk Tel: 0845 812 4000 -ask for 'HTA Payment Services' (out-of-hours answer-phone service) Fax: 0845 812 4001 -put 'HTA Order' on the fax header Payment methods Paying by chequeIf you pay by cheque, the cheque must be in pounds sterling, made payable to University of Southampton and drawn on a bank with a UK address.Paying by credit card You can order using your credit card by phone, fax or post. SubscriptionsNHS libraries can subscribe free of charge. Public libraries can subscribe at a reduced cost of £100 for each volume (normally comprising 40-50 titles). The commercial subscription rate is £400 per volume (addresses within the UK) and £600 per volume (addresses outside the UK). Please see our website for details. Subscriptions can be purchased only for the current or forthcoming volume.How do I get a copy of HTA on DVD?Please use the form on the HTA website (www.hta.ac.uk/htacd/index.shtml). HTA on DVD is currently free of charge worldwide.The website also provides information about the HTA programme and lists the membership of the various committees. ii ii HTA NIHR Health Technology Assessment programmeThe Health Technology Assessment (HTA) programme, part of the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), was set up in 1993. It produces high-quality research information on the effectiveness, costs and broader impact of health technologies for those who use, manage and provide care in the NHS. 'Health technologies' are broadly defined as all interventions used to promote health, prevent and treat disease, and improve rehabilitation and long-term care. The research findings from the HTA programme directly influence decision-making bodies such as the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) and the National Screening Committee (NSC). HTA findings also help to improve the quality of clinical practice in the NHS indirectly in that they form a key component of the 'National Knowledge Service' . The HTA programme is needs led in that it fills gaps in the evidence needed by the NHS. There are three routes to the start of projects. First is the commissioned route. Suggestions for resea...

show abstract

Section: Productivity and Cost-effectivenessmentioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Comparison Between Manual Readings In Manual-only Armmentioning

confidence: 99%

MAVARIC – a comparison of automation-assisted and manual cervical screening: a randomised controlled trial

Kitchener

Blanks²,

Cubie³

et al. 2011

Health Technol Assess

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The screening time for each slide (including any reviews by the supervisor) and the maximum workloads per cytologist considered in our study, based on those in the international literature [31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38], are shown in table 1. Fully automatic computer-assisted screening reduced the time of conventional cytology by 64% and of LBC by 40%.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Health Technology Assessment of Computer-Assisted Pap Test Screening in Italy

Palma

Moresco²,

Rossi³

2013

Acta Cytologica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To assess the introduction of computer-assisted Pap test screening in cervical cancer screening. Various scenarios are considered: conventional and liquid-based cytology (LBC) slides, fully automatic instrumentation (Becton Dickinson FocalPoint™ Slide Profiler and Hologic ThinPrep® Imaging System), and semiautomatic scanner (Hologic Integrated Imager I-Squared). Methods: A working group was formed that included researchers from the largest centers already using instrumentation. A questionnaire on laboratory management and on social/ethical issues and annual workload was proposed. Prices for the technology were obtained directly from the producers; costs were calculated from observed and literature data. The scope of the report and final draft were submitted to a consulting committee of stakeholders. Results: The break-even point was found to be 49,000 cases/year, if conventional slides were used, while it was near the theoretical maximum capacity, 70,000 cases/year, with LBC slides. Efficiency increased with the volume of slides. Screening time decreased by two thirds for conventional slides and by less than half for LBC slides. Acceptance of the instrumentation by the users was good. Conclusions: Computer-assisted screening may increase productivity even if in most situations it will mean additional costs. Furthermore, primary screening with human papillomavirus tests will drastically reduce the need for Pap test reading.

show abstract

“…A Danish laboratory in Odense (also having used PAPNET in the past century) remarked that in all 10 false-negative cases, the abnormal cells had been identified by the scanner, but misinterpreted by the CT [12]. These findings stress the importance of carefulness in the interpretation of the marked fields.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Switching from Neural Networks (PAPNET) to the Imager (Hologic) for Computer-Assisted Screening

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: The large set of ThinPrep slides prepared in the Leiden Cytology and Pathology Laboratory is exploited for calculating the impact of the transition from PAPNET neural network scanning to the Imager technology. Study Design: All cervical samples were suspended and fixed in the coagulant fixative BoonFix. We compared 57,541 ThinPrep slides which were scanned by PAPNET and 64,273 ThinPrep slides processed with the Imager: 99,157 cases originated from the Dutch population screening program of asymptomatic women (screenees) and the remaining 22,657 samples were of symptomatic women. In the PAPNET series, 23% were diagnosed by additional light microscopy; in the Imager method, all slides were studied light microscopically. The cytoscores (positive cytology per 1,000 samples) were calculated for normal, atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASC-US), cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) grades I–II, and for CIN III+. The odds ratios (ORs) for the positive cytoscores were assessed for both the screenees and the symptomatic women. Results: The cytoscores, per 1,000 cases, for ASC-US varied from 17.77 to 40.59, for CIN I–II from 7.17 to 33.35, and for CIN III+ from 2.81 to 8.8. These 6 cytoscores were higher for symptomatic women than for screenees. We observe significantly elevated ORs for the Imager for ASC-US (1.26 and 1.23), CIN I–II (1.45) and for CIN III+ (1.58 and 1.45). These 3 ORs are higher for screenees than for symptomatic women. Conclusion: The Imager technology is more efficacious, particularly for handling screenee slides.

show abstract

Automated screening versus manual screening: A comparison of the ThinPrep® imaging system and manual screening in a time study

Cited by 35 publications

References 11 publications

MAVARIC – a comparison of automation-assisted and manual cervical screening: a randomised controlled trial

MAVARIC – a comparison of automation-assisted and manual cervical screening: a randomised controlled trial

Health Technology Assessment of Computer-Assisted Pap Test Screening in Italy

Switching from Neural Networks (PAPNET) to the Imager (Hologic) for Computer-Assisted Screening

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About