Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Trends in Cervical Cytology Screening and Reporting Practices: Results From the College of American Pathologists 2011 PAP Education Supplemental Questionnaire.
Crothers, Barbara A; Darragh, Teresa M; Tambouret, Rosemary H; Nayar, Ritu; Barkan, Guliz A; Zhao, Chengquan; Booth, Christine Noga; Padmanabhan, Vijayalakshmi; Tabatabai, Z Laura; Souers, Rhona J; Thomas, Nicole; Wilbur, David C; Moriarty, Ann T.
Afiliación
  • Crothers BA; From the Department of Pathology and Area Laboratory Services, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, Maryland (Dr Crothers); the Pathology Cytology Laboratory, Mount Zion Medical Center, University of California, San Francisco (Dr Darragh); the Department of Pathology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston (Drs Tambouret and Wilbur); the Department of Cytopathology, Northwestern University Medical School, Chicago, Illinois (Dr Nayar); the Department of Pathology, Loyola Univer
Arch Pathol Lab Med ; 140(1): 13-21, 2016 Jan.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26046490
ABSTRACT
CONTEXT The College of American Pathologists periodically surveys laboratories to determine changes in cytopathology practices. We report the results of a 2011 gynecologic cytology survey.

OBJECTIVE:

To provide a cross-sectional survey of gynecologic cytology practices in 2010.

DESIGN:

In 2011, a survey was sent to 1604 laboratories participating in the College of American Pathologists gynecologic cytology interlaboratory comparison education program and proficiency testing programs requesting data from 2010 on the following topics terminology/reporting, cytotechnologist workload, quality assurance, reagents, and ancillary testing.

RESULTS:

Six hundred and twenty-five laboratories (39%) replied to the survey. The nonstandard use of "low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion cannot exclude high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion" is used by most laboratories to report the presence of low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion with possibility of high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion. Most laboratories also report the presence or absence of cells from the transformation zone. Most respondents do not limit cytotechnologist screening workload during the work shift. Only about one-third of laboratories (188 of 582; 32%) use image-assisted screening devices. Rapid prescreening as a quality assurance measure is used by only 3.5% (21 of 594) of the laboratories. When used for screening, most laboratories use the imager for retrospective review of slides to detect human locator and interpretive errors. Most laboratories receive both liquid-based cytology samples (mainly ThinPrep, Hologic, Marlborough, Massachusetts) and conventional Papanicolaou tests. Expiration dates of liquid-based cytology test vials are not usually recorded.

CONCLUSIONS:

The field of gynecologic cytology is evolving rapidly. These survey results offer a snapshot of national gynecologic cytology practices in 2010.
Asunto(s)

Texto completo: 1 Banco de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Patología Clínica / Frotis Vaginal / Interpretación de Imagen Asistida por Computador / Neoplasias del Cuello Uterino / Ginecología Tipo de estudio: Diagnostic_studies / Observational_studies / Prevalence_studies / Risk_factors_studies / Screening_studies Límite: Female / Humans País/Región como asunto: America do norte Idioma: En Revista: Arch Pathol Lab Med Año: 2016 Tipo del documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Banco de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Patología Clínica / Frotis Vaginal / Interpretación de Imagen Asistida por Computador / Neoplasias del Cuello Uterino / Ginecología Tipo de estudio: Diagnostic_studies / Observational_studies / Prevalence_studies / Risk_factors_studies / Screening_studies Límite: Female / Humans País/Región como asunto: America do norte Idioma: En Revista: Arch Pathol Lab Med Año: 2016 Tipo del documento: Article