Objective: To evaluate the performance of laboratories accredited by the National Health System that perform cytopathology examination of the uterine cervix after 10 years of participation in external quality monitoring (eQM). Study Design: Seven laboratories were assessed in this study. To assess the concordance of the representation of epithelia and results, 6,536 examinations (3,433 in 2007 and 3,103 in 2017) were reviewed. Statistical analysis was performed using the κ coefficient as well as the χ2 and the Fisher exact test (p < 0.05). Results: All laboratories showed adequate infrastructure and internal quality monitoring. Regarding the representation of the epithelia, the concordance remained excellent (κ between 0.84 and 0.94). In 2007, 26 false-negative results (FN), 157 false-positive results (FP), and 79 delays in clinical conduct (DCC) were identified (κ = 0.80). In 2017, 24 FN, 42 FP, and 38 DCC were identified (κ = 0.90). Five laboratories showed improvement in concordance from 2007 to 2017. We observed significant improvement in cytomorphological criteria of the results: atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (p < 0.001), atypical squamous cells cannot exclude high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (p < 0.016), and low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (p < 0.001). We also observed a considerable improvement in the results of cellular abnormalities in glandular epithelium (p < 0.0504). Conclusions: Ten years after the implementation of eQM, improvements in the concordance of results were observed as well as reductions in FN, FP, and DCC in all laboratories monitored.

Keywords:
Quality control, Mass screening, Interobserver variability, Uterine cervical neoplasms, Reproducibility of results
© 2019 S. Karger AG, Basel
2019
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.