Title

The Role of Monitoring Interpretive Rates, Concordance Between Cytotechnologist and Pathologist Interpretations Before Sign-Out, and Turnaround Time in Gynecologic Cytology Quality Assurance Findings From the College of American Pathologists Gynecologic Cytopathology Quality Consensus Conference Working Group 1

Authors

Authors

K. M. Clary; D. D. Davey; S. Naryshkin; R. M. Austin; N. Thomas; B. A. Chmara; C. Sugrue;J. Tworek

Comments

Authors: contact us about adding a copy of your work at STARS@ucf.edu

Abbreviated Journal Title

Arch. Pathol. Lab. Med.

Keywords

HUMAN-PAPILLOMAVIRUS; CERVICAL CYTOLOGY; WOMEN; LABORATORIES; GUIDELINES; MANAGEMENT; TESTS; CELLS; Medical Laboratory Technology; Medicine, Research & Experimental; Pathology

Abstract

Context.-The College of American Pathologists (CAP) conducted a national survey of gynecologic cytology quality assurance (QA) practices. Experts in gynecologic cytology were asked to join 5 working groups that studied the survey data on different aspects of QA. Evaluating the survey data and follow-up questions online, together with a review of pertinent literature, the working groups developed a series of preliminary statements on good laboratory practices in cytology QA. These were presented at a consensus conference and electronic voting occurred. Objective.-To evaluate a set of QA monitors in gynecologic cytology. Working group 1 evaluated (1) monitoring interpretive rate categories for Papanicolaou tests (Pap tests), (2) concordance of cytotechnologist and pathologist interpretations before sign-out, and (3) turnaround time for Pap tests. Data Sources.-The statements are based on a survey of gynecologic cytology QA practice patterns and of opinions from working group members and consensus conference attendees. Conclusions.-The outcomes of this process demonstrate the current state of practice patterns in gynecologic cytology QA. Monitoring interpretive rates for all Bethesda System categories is potentially useful, and it is most useful to monitor interpretive rates for cytotechnologists individually and in comparison to the entire laboratory. Laboratories need to determine what level of discrepancy between cytotechnologist and pathologist interpretations of Pap tests is important to track. Laboratories should consider formalizing procedures and policies to adjudicate such discrepant interpretations. Turnaround time should be monitored in gynecologic cytology, but individual laboratories should determine how to measure and use turnaround time internally.

Journal Title

Archives of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine

Volume

137

Issue/Number

2

Publication Date

1-1-2013

Document Type

Article

Language

English

First Page

164

Last Page

174

WOS Identifier

WOS:000319776000005

ISSN

0003-9985

Share

COinS