Are women sufficiently well informed to provide valid consent for the cervical smear test?

Three hundred women attending colposcopy for the first time, following an abnormal cervical smear, were invited to fill in a questionnaire. This covered aspects of their understanding of the cervical smear test and the NHS Cervical Screening Programme (NHSCSP). In addition, it covered aspects of consent to the test. The response rate was 83%. Seventy percent thought that the NHSCSP is working well and 72% were aware that probably over 3000 cases of cervical cancer per year are being saved by the NHSCSP. However, 55% did not know that the death rate from cervical cancer is decreasing. 96% were aware that the main reason for a cervical smear is to prevent the development of cervical cancer, by finding early treatable abnormalities. Similarly, 94% were aware that the presence of abnormal cells on a cervical smear indicated a possible but not definitive indication of cervical precancer or cancer. Disappointingly, only 5 had seen the new NHSCSP information poster on the cervical smear test and only 44% had been given written information about the test. Consent for the test in 59% of women had been implied rather than expressed and 30% of women providing expressed consent had signed to that effect. In 42% of women, the smear taker or a doctor had failed to discuss the reason for having a cervical smear and had not explained about its advantages and limitations. In 72%, the smear taker or doctor had not explained that the cervical smear test can never be 100% accurate and that some laboratory errors are unavoidable. It is likely that women attending for colposcopy are a highly motivated cohort in relation to their understanding of the cervical smear test and the NHSCSP. Accordingly, understanding in the more general female population is likely to be considerably less. It would appear that women are often suboptimally informed to provide valid consent for the cervical smear test.     

An audit of the positive predictive value of high-grade dyskaryosis in cervical smears: 2001–2002

The positive predictive value (PPV) of high-grade dyskaryosis for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 (CIN2) or worse on histology is published annually for the laboratories in the UK National Health Service Cervical Screening Programme (NHSCSP). The PPV fell in 2001 compared with 2000 for four of the five consultants reporting cervical smears in our laboratory, the greatest fall being from 91.6% to 77.9%. Investigation of the possible reasons for the fall suggested the main cause lay outside the laboratory in the type of biopsy taken at colposcopy. We conclude that biopsy type affects accuracy of PPV calculations. There is variation in collection and submission of KC61 data including PPV across laboratories. This factor needs to be taken into account when publishing and comparing laboratory data for the NHSCSP.     

Liquid‐based cytology: is this the way forward for cervical screening?

Liquid-based cytology (LBC) is currently being marketed as an alternative methodology to replace the conventional PAP smear in cervical cytology. A substantial body of literature exists in support of LBC, some of which is at least partially sponsored by product manufacturers. The majority of published literature in support of LBC employs Bethesda reporting terminology. In this study we have analysed published raw data and presented this in NHSCSP terminology. Claims relating to sensitivity, specificity and smear adequacy have then been considered with reference to this data. Our analysis of existing data does not support the nationwide implementation of LBC at present. Further studies are recommended in order to evaluate the place of this technology within the NHSCSP.     

ABC3 Part I: a review of the guidelines for terminology,classification and management of cervical cytology in England

J. H. F. Smith ABC3 Part I: a review of the guidelines for terminology, classification and management of cervical cytology in England The provision of guidance on cytology reporting and evaluation, first outlined in 1995 with the publication of Achievable Standards, Benchmarks for Reporting, and Criteria for Evaluating Cervical Cytopathology (ABC), and subsequently revised and expanded in a second edition in 2000, has been pivotal to the success of the National Health Service Cervical Screening Programme (NHSCSP), ensuring that standards are upheld, and that rigorous evaluation and quality assurance take place. In the last decade, major changes to the NHSCSP, notably the adoption of revised age ranges and screening intervals for all women in England, implementation of liquid‐based cytology and, most recently, the decision to introduce high‐risk human papillomavirus (HR‐HPV) testing for triage of low‐grade and borderline (equivalent to 'atypical') cytological abnormalities and test of cure after treatment of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) determined that an updated version of ABC was required. The third edition of ABC recommends adoption, with minor modification, of the revised British Society for Clinical Cytology terminology and provides guidance on the management of abnormal cytology results linked to this terminology taking account of HR‐HPV testing. To accommodate these changes, expanded result codes, which are electronic codes used to transfer management information to central computers for follow‐up, call and recall of individual women, have been developed. Further guidance on specimen adequacy is also provided. Revised performance indicators are described and explained in a separate article by R. Blanks in this issue of Cytopathology. All the changes in ABC3 are designed to support the mission statement of the NHSCSP that ‘the objective of cervical screening is to reduce cervical cancer incidence and mortality by screening with a high sensitivity for the detection of CIN2 or worse, whilst maintaining a high specificity’.     

Comparison of Cervical Cytology Reporting Rates: A Useful Adjunct to External Quality Assurance

Reporting rates for abnormal and inadequate cervical smears have been compared during a 5-year period in nine laboratories and related to targets and achievable ranges recently recommended by the National Health Service Cervical Screening Programme (NHSCSP). There was improved consistency in rates for all grades of abnormality as well as inadequate smears. the average rate for moderate and severe dyskaryosis combined increased to 1.6%, which is the target recommended by the NHSCSP, and the standard deviation fell from 0.52 to 0.27. Although average rates for mild dyskaryosis and borderline nuclear change combined and inadequate smears both remained within the achievable range recommended by the NHSCSP, four laboratories were above the upper limit for each of those categories in the final year. During the 5 years of the study there was a fall in the number of ‘inflammatory’smears coded as negative with a recommendation for early repeat. Only one laboratory still uses that category. the challenge for the future lies in controlling high rates for minor abnormalities and inadequate smears while maintaining acceptable rates for moderate and severe dyskaryosis. Comparison of reporting rates is regarded by the participating laboratories as a useful adjunct to external quality assurance. Les taux des frottis cervico-utérins anormaux et inadéquats ont été comparés sur une période de cinq ans pour neuf laboratoires et évalues par rapport aux objectifs et aux intervalles de valeur récemment publiés dans les recommandations du programme de dépistage cervico-utérin du NHS (NHSCSP). Une amélioration de l'homogenéïté des taux de tous les grades d'anomalies aussi bien que celui des frottis inadéquats a été observée. Les taux moyens de toutes les catégories ont augmentés. Le taux moyen de I'ensemble des dyscaryoses modérées et sévères, a augmenté pour atteindre 1,6%, ce qui est I'objectif recommandé par le NHSCSP, et I'ecart type est passé de 0,52 à 0,27. Bien que les taux moyens de l'ensemble des dyscaryoses légéres et des modifications nucléaires “borderline” (BNC) sgient restés dans l'intervalle recommandé par le NHSCSP, quatre laboratoires étaient audessus de la limite supérieure pour chacune de ces catégories, au cours de la derniére année. Au cours des cinq années de cette étude, il y a eu une chute du nombre des “frottis inflammatoires” codés comme négatifs mais où un contrôle rapproaché avait été recommandé. Un seul laboratoire utilise encore cette catégorie. Pour le futur, le challenge se situe au nivau du contrôle des taux élevés d'anomalies mineures et de frottis inadéquats tout en maintenant des taux acceptables de lésions de dyscaryoses moyennes à sévères. La comparaison des taux des différentes catégories de frottis est considérée comme une aide très utile pour I'assurance de qualité externe pour les différents laboratoires participants. Der Anteil abnormer und nicht verwertbarer Abstriche wurde über einen Zeitraum von fünf Jahren zwischen neun Labors und den Empfehlungen des National, Health Service Cervical Screening Programme (NHSCSP) verglichen. Es ergab sich eine bessere Übereinstimmung für alle Anomalien sowie die Rate nichtauswertbarer Abstriche. Der Anteil mässinger und schwerer Dysplasien zusammengefasst stieg auf 1,6% und entsprach damit der Vorgabe des NHSCSP. Die Standardab-weichung sank von 0,52 auf 0,27. Obgleich auch der Anteil der leichten Dysplasien und borderline-Fälle im Bereich der NHSCSP-Empfehlungen blieben lagen dennoch vier Labors auch im letzten Jahr oberhalb der Grenzwerte. Im Untersuchungszeitraum sank die Zahl der als enzündlich beurteilten und zur Kontrolle empfohlenen Fälle. Nur eines der Labors benützt diese Beurteilung noch. Die Forderung der Zukunft wird die Senkung der nichtauswertbaren Präparate und leichten Dysplasien unter Beibehaltung des Standards für mässige und schwere Dysplasien sein. Der Vergleich der Beurteilungen zwischen Labors wird als nützliche Ergänzung der externen Qualitätssicherung angesehen.     

Monitoring and evaluating the performance of the UK NHS Cervical Screening Programme: monitoring performance by using cytology outcomes adjusted for population characteristics

Current quality assurance measures used in the NHS cervical screening programme (NHSCSP) include a review of laboratories with percentages of moderate/severe and borderline/mild smear results outside the 10th-90th percentiles. The method is limited by the fact that many of these outlier smear percentages may reflect laboratories covering populations with low or high risk and/or short or long average screening intervals. This paper outlines a new approach to aid the detection of outlier laboratories, by using data collected at the primary care trust (PCT) or health authority (HA) level and making allowances for population characteristics and screening interval. The setting is the NHSCSP in England using annual data provided by HAs. Data from the screening year 2000-01 is used to illustrate the methodology, although the methods can also be applied to data at the PCT level (now being collected for 2002-03 onwards). Percentages of smear results have been analysed against a series of explanatory variables using logistic regression models. These explanatory variables include Townsend deprivation index, uptake-corrected ethnic minority composition, a measure of screening interval, area type and region. An expected percentage of borderline/mild and moderate/severe smears is estimated from the models and an observed : predicted ratio (OPRmod/sev and OPRbord/mild) calculated. Low values are suggestive of relative undercalling and high values overcalling, after allowance for population characteristics. Analysis of data for 2000-01 showed that the OPRmod/sev for the 99 HAs varied from 0.68 to 1.44. Laboratories with low percentages of moderate/severe smears, but associated with PCTs or HAs with OPRmod/sev values closer to unity may not need to be investigated as their observed rates are consistent with predicted rates based on population characteristics. The method could also be directly applied to laboratories if further information on the population covered by each laboratory were routinely collected.     

External quality assessment in gynaecological cytology: The Trent Region experience

A Department of Health Executive Letter stated in 1998 that the principal function of external quality assessment (EQA) is educational. Subsequently, in England, it has no longer been acceptable to assess performance in gynaecological cytology by proficiency testing. This paper describes the EQA scheme in gynaecological cytology that has been run by the Trent Regional Gynaecological Pathology Quality Assurance Group for the NHS Cervical Screening Programme (NHSCSP) since 1998. It conforms as closely as possible to the recommendations published by the Department of Health Working Group on Histopathology EQA Accreditation, and replaced the national proficiency testing protocol. The educational value of the scheme is derived predominantly from a numerical score which provides confidential and quantitative feedback to all participants. Personal performance monitoring occurs as a secondary function. For primary screeners and checkers, this is based purely on the distinction between negative, inadequate and abnormal smears. For pathologists, personal performance monitoring also includes grading of abnormalities. The EQA has been designed so that all professional groups participate in a manner that closely mimics normal practice. Only slides that have achieved an 80% consensus amongst participants are used in the EQA. Substandard performance has been defined as those participants with scores falling below the 2.5%ile. The paper describes the EQA in detail and illustrates its use by means of the second round results. The EQA protocol developed within Trent and described in this paper has contributed to proposals contained in the current national EQA in gynaecological cytology for the NHSCSP. In particular this paper highlights the effectiveness of the scoring system contained within the Trent and National EQA protocols.     

An audit of colposcopy appointment processes in women with abnormal cervical cytology

C. Kietpeerakool, M. Manopunya, P. Phuprasertsak, T. Jaijit and J. Srisomboon An audit of colposcopy appointment processes in women with abnormal cervical cytology Objectives: This study was conducted to audit the waiting times and default rates of colposcopy using the standard requirements of the National Health Service Cervical Screening Programme (NHSCSP) 2004 guidelines. Methods: The records of 291 women with abnormal cervical smears referred to the colposcopy clinic between January and December 2008 at Chiang Mai University Hospital, Thailand, were reviewed. Results: The proportion of women with abnormal cervical smears of any grade receiving colposcopy appointments within 8 weeks of referral (96.9%) achieved the minimum requirements (≥ 90%). However, the waiting times for women with high‐grade squamous intraepithelial lesion, glandular cell abnormality and invasive lesion smears were longer than recommended by NHSCSP guidelines. The default rate of 15.8% in this study was slightly higher than recommended by the guidelines (< 15%). Having no health insurance, being known to have HIV infection and waiting times longer than 4 weeks were independent predictors of default from an initial colposcopy appointment. Conclusion: The waiting times for colposcopy among women with high‐grade smear abnormality and the default rate failed to meet standard requirements. Designing an effective protocol for colposcopy appointment processes is warranted.     

Posters. P7 Development of a web‐based resource pack for cytology training officers

The NHSCSP Cervical Cytopathology Training Log and accompanying Workbook are central to the education and training of new recruits in cytology laboratories in the UK. These are currently available only in paper format and do not fully address the needs of training officers and trainees in Wales. A web‐based resource pack, which complements the NHSCSP training documents, has been developed by the Welsh Cytology Training School to address these problems. The pack consists of the following sections and has recently been posted on the Welsh intranet:

• ? guide for training officers;
• ? teaching aids, including handouts and ‘powerpoint’ tutorials;
• ? image library;
• ? worksheets; and
• ? competency sheets.

The electronic format allows for instant updating and simultaneous availability to all training officers in Wales. It has been devised in an effort to standardize the training of new cytology recruits in laboratories throughout Wales, thereby ensuring that all new trainees receive the same high‐quality education and training wherever they are employed. CPD modules in gynaecological and non‐gynaecological cytology are being developed. Samples from the resource pack will be presented.     

Technical External Quality Assessment for SurePath® stained liquid-based cytology gynaecological cervical samples using control material – a novel approach

Aims and objective: The Technical External Quality Assessment Scheme (TEQA) introduced in Wales is based on NHSCSP publication No 19 [External Quality Assessment Scheme for the Evaluation of Papanicolaou Staining in Cervical Cytology] which sets out the policies and standard operating procedures for the TEQA of Papanicolaou staining of gynaecological cervical samples. As part of a development plan for the TEQA scheme in Wales, the use of a control sample was introduced to the assessment process – a common control sample can provide a consistent assessment parameter independent of the recommended slide selection process [External Quality Assessment Scheme for the Evaluation of Papanicolaou Staining in Cervical Cytology, NHSCSP Publication No 19, February 2004] enabling direct comparison of staining standards for laboratories within the region; this counters selection variation bias, establishing a process that may be more representative of routine staining results. Methods: A cervical sample was selected in line with the criteria described in publication 19 [External Quality Assessment Scheme for the Evaluation of Papanicolaou Staining in Cervical Cytology, NHSCSP Publication No 19, February 2004]. Thirteen slides were prepared by the scheme facilitator from this anonymized sample. These control slides were subsequently ‘fixed’ but not stained, then distributed to the laboratories participating in the TEQA scheme. The slides were stained using their standard regime, then returned to the facilitator for assessment. The slides showed consistent staining with no significant inter‐laboratory variation, however, the eosinophilic stained components exhibited an artificial colouration, which slightly altered the expected stained appearance; this was thought to be due to ‘cross‐reactivity’ of the spray fixative with the preserving agent. To address this artefact, a further development of control procedures was devised utilizing a pooled control sample procedure. Residual material from a number of similar samples was pooled and distributed in aliquots to participant laboratories for standard processing and staining; the completed slides were returned to the scheme facilitator for assessment. Results: The pooled sample slides were assessed at the next scheduled quarterly TEQA assessment. The overall scoring for these samples produced an acceptable level of Papanicolaou staining for 12 of the laboratories – only one laboratory produced a marginal score. The artefactual presentation of eosinophilia was not seen. Discussion/conclusion: This method of producing control material establishes consistency in the TEQA comparative assessment process, counters selection bias and reduces the time demands associated with slide selection. It may also prove useful in identifying technical problems within laboratories during sample preparation prior to or during staining, including equipment or process faults. This technique is now well established locally as an enhancement of the current TEQA scheme for the assessment of slide staining. We feel that this enhancement could be incorporated as a new initiative in the current National TEQA scheme as a complement to the established selection process.     

O-12The use of control samples in the PAPANICOLAOU technical external quality assessment scheme

Technical external quality assessment (TEQA) in Wales is based on NHSCSP publication 19, which sets out policy and procedures for the scheme. The purpose of EQA is to sustain and improve the quality of patient care by promoting a high standard of performance. Following the introduction of liquid base cytology (LBC) technical limitations, particularly in assessing counterstaining, have been noted. LBC provides the means to address these limitations - As part of a development plan for TEQA in Wales, a control sample procedure was introduced to the scheme. A pooled control sample was composed, containing residual material from six 'matched' negative samples, re-suspended in collection fluid. Aliquots of this sample were distributed for processing and staining, to the 13 laboratories registered with the scheme. The slides produced were assessed at a scheduled TEQA assessment in accordance with the standard criteria. Initial overall scoring for these control samples produced acceptable levels of staining for 12 of the laboratories - one laboratory produced a marginal score. Repeat distributions have shown maintained or improved results. This method provides a prospective quality assessment tool, which counters the emphasis on slide selection and eliminates potential selection bias, whilst introducing consistency and improving comparability across participant laboratories. The method may also prove helpful in identifying technical inconsistencies such as equipment or handling errors that may occur during sample processing prior to or during staining. The control process, which is now used routinely in the Welsh TEQA scheme; is considered complimentary to, and not a replacement for, the selection process established in NHSCSP #19. However, we feel that this development could be considered as a new initiative in the National TEQA scheme. The control process is applicable to all LBC systems in current use.     

A survey of biomedical scientists and consultant pathologists involved in the cervical screening programme

The past decade has seen a transformation in the National Health Service Cervical Screening Programme (NHSCSP) largely driven by responses to various screening scandals. Independent inquiries into these laboratory failures have identified a number of contributing factors. The aim of this postal survey was to determine how widespread these factors are throughout screening laboratories in England. The results indicate that issues around recruitment and retention of staff, the training of pathologists and low morale appear to be widespread. However, the results do not indicate a widespread breakdown in working relationships between consultants and biomedical scientists, although there is room for improvement in their relationships with hospital management. Finally, there seem to be mixed messages about the commitment of consultants to the screening programme.     

The invasive cervical cancer review: psychological issues surrounding disclosure

An audit of the screening history of all new cervical cancer cases has been a requirement since April 2007. While NHS cervical screening programmes (NHSCSP) guidance requires that women diagnosed with cervical cancer are offered the findings of the audit, as yet there has been no research to investigate the psychological impact that meeting to discuss the findings might have on patients. This is in spite of the fact that cytological under‐call may play a role in as many as 20% of cervical cancer cases. This review draws on the literature concerning breaking bad news, discussing cancer and disclosing medical errors, in order to gain insight into both the negative and positive consequences that may accompany a cervical screening review meeting. We conclude that while patients are likely to experience some distress at disclosure, there are also likely to be positive aspects, such as greater trust and improved perception of care.     

An audit of cervical cytology in HIV‐positive women

O. E. O. Hotonu, J. Hussey, M. S. T. Basta, V. Wadehra, P. Cross and M. L. Schmid
An audit of cervical cytology in HIV‐positive women Objective: To investigate whether a cohort of human immunodeficiency virus‐positive (HIV+) women were having annual cervical cytology as recommended by the English National Health Service cervical screening programme (NHSCSP) guidelines. Methods: An audit of cervical cytology in an HIV+ cohort of 187 women by obtaining their last cervical cytology result and recall from local cytology services. Results: Of the 187 women in the audit, two were ineligible, leaving 185 women, 167 (90.3%) of whom were aged 25–64 years and eligible for screening. Of the 185 women, 126 (68.1%) had a cytology history, 50 (27%) had never had cervical cytology and nine (4.9%) had inadequate details to ascertain whether or not they had a cytology history. Of the 126 with a cytology record, 34 (27%) had a current cytological abnormality, which was low grade in 25 (19.8%) and high grade in nine (7.1%). Among women aged 25–64 years attending the clinic, these percentages were significantly higher than expected for England as a whole (P < 0.001). Of 126 women with a cytology record, 29 (23%) were overdue for their recall date and of these the previous test was abnormal in 14 (48.3%). Cytology tests were taken within the community setting in 61 (48.4%), whereas 65 (51.6%) were seen either at an HIV sexual health clinic or were under colposcopy follow‐up. Of 91 women with negative cytology only 50 (54.9%) were recommended for repeat in 12 months. Conclusion: This audit demonstrates a high rate of cytological abnormalities among HIV+ women compared with the screening population at large. Implementation of NHSCSP guidelines has been difficult and requires improved care pathways between HIV clinics, primary care and laboratories.     

Cervical screening: how often should women be screened?

Introduction
As a result of major improvements that have been made to cervical screening during the last 15 years, and implementation of call and recall to invite all women aged 20–64 for screening, the incidence of cervical carcinoma has fallen by 42% since 1990¹. Cervical cancer is now a rare disease, largely thanks to the widespread uptake of screening by the women at risk. Despite the manifest success of the NHS Cervical Screening Programme (NHSCSP), there is pressure on one hand to improve its sensitivity by the introduction of new technology, including human papillomavirus (HPV) testing², and on the other hand to reduce the cost of the programme, which is more than £130m per year. The main method suggested to reduce costs is the restriction of routine screening to an interval of 5 years^3–5.     

Cervical screening in England and Wales: its effect has been underestimated

Opinions about cervical screening in the UK tend to follow one of two negative lines of thought. The first is that cervical cancer is a rare disease, and too much time and effort are spent on screening. The second is that it has been relatively ineffective, since incidence of invasive carcinoma did not fall until the NHS Cervical Screening Programme (NHSCSP) was introduced in 1988, although it fell by 40% since then. This paper presents publicly available data to demonstrate that neither of these views is true. Registrations of invasive carcinoma of the uterine cervix and carcinoma in situ in England and Wales between 1971 and 1996 show that a substantially increased risk of disease in women born since 1940 has been reversed, almost certainly by greatly improved screening. Cervical carcinoma is now a rare disease because most cases are prevented before they become invasive, mostly by screening young women, aged 20-40, before the decade of life when symptomatic cervical carcinoma most frequently presents.     

The future of cytology laboratories

1. NHSCSP Annual Review 2006. Patnick J (ed.). Sheffield, UK, NHSCSP; 2007.
2. Dowie R, Stoykova B, Crawford D. et al . Liquid-based cytology can improve efficiency of cervical smear readers: evidence from timing surveys in two NHS cytology laboratories. Cytopathology 2006; 17(2):65–72.
3. Williams AR. Liquid-based cytology and conventional smears compared over two 12-month periods. Cytopathology 2006; 17(2):82–85.
4. Gregory LS, Dudding N, Smith JHF. The impact of introducing liquid based cytology into a routine screening laboratory. Cytopathology 2006; 17(S1):24.
5. Lord Carter of Coles. Report of the Review of NHS Pathology Services in England 2006. Department of Health.
6. Kardos TF. The focal point system: focal point slide profiler and focal point GS. Cancer 2004; 102(6):334–39.
7. Biscotti CV, Dawson AE, Dziura B. et al. Assisted primary screening using the automated ThinPrep Imaging System. Am J Clin Pathol 2005; 123(2):281–87.
8. Eltoum IA, Roberson J. Impact of HPV testing, HPV vaccine development and changing screening frequency on national Pap test volume: projections from the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS). Cancer 2007; 111(1):34–40.
9. Kohli M, Ferko N, Martin A. et al. Estimating the long-term impact of a prophylactic human papillomavirus 16/18 vaccine on the burden of cervical cancer in the UK. Br J Cancer 2007; 96(1):143–50.
10. Franco EL, Cuzick J, Hildesheim A, de Sanjose S. Chapter 20: issues in planning cervical cancer screening in the era of HPV vaccination. Vaccine 2006; 24 (Suppl. 3):S171–S177.
11. Peto J, Gilham C, Fletcher O, Matthews FE. The cervical cancer epidemic that screening has prevented in the UK. Lancet 2004; 364(9430):249–56.     

Improving the NHS cervical screening laboratory performance indicators by making allowance for population age, risk and screening interval

OBJECTIVE: One of the key performance measures in the monitoring of the NHS cervical screening programme is the targeting of laboratories with very high or low percentages (outside the 10th-90th percentile) of adequate smears that have moderate dyskaryosis or worse. These laboratories are assumed to include those laboratories that may have extremes of sensitivity and specificity. A clear limitation with this methodology is that laboratories do not examine smears from women with the same underlying risk, age distribution or screening interval and adjustment for these factors should considerably improve the method. METHODS: This paper describes a method that allows for these confounding variables and a new age-risk-interval adjusted moderate dyskaryosis or worse rate (ARI-adjusted mod+ rate) can be calculated. The adjusted rate is the rate of moderate or worse dyskaryotic smears that the laboratory would have detected had it been screening women with an English 'average' age-risk-interval. All laboratories can therefore be compared using this method. RESULTS: The methodology is illustrated using data from the NHSCSP South West Region. The particularly low percentage of moderate or worse smears detected by one or two laboratories can be shown to be due to a local screened population with a very low risk because of a high mean age, relatively short screening interval and census variables associated with a low risk, rather than any under-calling by the associated laboratories. CONCLUSIONS: The ARI-adjusted mod+ rate requires to be calculated for all laboratories in England if it is to be used as a primary performance indicator. Alternatively, it can be used to further examine laboratories that are deemed to be outliers using the current methodology.     

Rapid review in cervical cytology: a retrospective review of cases detected on rapid review within a DGH cytology department and subsequent outcome

We retrospectively reviewed smears detected by rapid review within a district general hospital (DGH) laboratory over a period of 33 months and the subsequent histological or cytological outcome. Sixty-three cases had adequate follow-up data: 32 subsequently had two negative smears and 31 had a histological abnormality on subsequent biopsy. Twenty were high-grade lesions (CIN2, CIN3 or a glandular lesion) and eight of these were preceded by a low-grade smear abnormality. We reviewed and compared the pattern and distribution of smear abnormalities in these 63 cases. Abnormalities were often present within few cells (76%, n = 48 with 50 abnormal cells or less) or in micro-biopsies (27%, n = 17). There was no statistical difference in the pattern and distribution of smear abnormality between the rapid review-detected smears with a biopsy-proven abnormality and those with negative follow-up smears. Overall, the positive predictive value for high-grade CIN detected by rapid review (75%) was within NHSCSP achievable standards targets. This review of rapid review-detected abnormalities and the biopsy and cytological follow-up reiterates the importance of the method in cervical screening.     

Posters. P11 Positive predictive values for high and low‐grade cytological abnormalities as surrogates for specificity and sensitivity

Introduction Positive predictive value (PPV), measuring the percentage of moderate dyskaryosis or worse confirmed as CIN2 or worse, is used as a measure of accuracy in cervical screening. However, it relates more to specificity than sensitivity because the denominator includes false positives rather than false negatives. Low values reflect over‐reporting of high‐grade dyskaryosis but high values may reflect under‐reporting. Sensitivity is impossible to measure from correlation of cytology with outcome because women with negative cytology are rarely referred for colposcopy. Rates of CIN3 resulting from referrals for low‐grade cytology may be used as a surrogate for sensitivity, as high values may reflect under‐reporting (ref). Study design Outcome of colposcopy referrals was monitored during a period of 4 years, using a fail‐safe database. Results PPV at Guy's & St Thomas rose from 54% in 1998/1999 to 69% in 2001/2002. The former was below the NHSCSP recommended range. During the same period of time CIN1 rates for moderate dyskaryosis fell from 37% to 24%, reflecting the main source of discrepancy. While specificity increased (as reflected by increasing PPV) sensitivity remained constant in that CIN3 rates for mild dyskaryosis and borderline remained below 6%: average rates in England have fallen over the last 3 years and were 7.4% in 2000/2001 (ref). CIN2 rates for mild dyskaryosis also remained constant at 11% to 12%. Conclusion Correlation of biopsy results with high‐ and low‐grade cytological abnormalities is a useful method of monitoring accuracy of cytology reporting, and can be used to measure over‐ and under‐reporting as surrogates for specificity and sensitivity.