Cervical cytopathology reporting systems. Helping or hindering patient management?
OBJECTIVE
When a Pap smear is reported, the general practitioner needs to know whether it was technically satisfactory and, if abnormal, what kind of abnormality was found, in order to arrange appropriate management. A random survey of non hospital based cytology reporting laboratories in NSW was undertaken to determine the efficiency of this process.


METHODS
This study examines the types of cytopathology reporting protocols used, the means provided by the laboratory to assist general practitioners in assessing the quality of their Pap smears and what, if any, management advice was given to general practitioners.


RESULTS
Not only do different laboratories use different terminologies to report on Pap smears, but the majority use terms from at least two different reporting systems. Seven of the 10 laboratories provided feedback on the adequacy of the Pap smears while only 4 of the 10 laboratories provided management advice.


CONCLUSIONS
If the 1993 National Health and Medical Research Council recommendations are followed, cytopathology reporting will be primarily Bethesda based with the pathology laboratories providing feedback on technical aspects of Pap smears taking as well as management advice.
Molodysky
E
E
Department of General Practice, University of Sydney, New South Wales.
Bridges-Webb
C
C
D002278:Carcinoma in Situ / Q000473:pathology; D005260:Female; D005831:Genital Diseases, Female / Q000473:pathology; D006801:Humans; D007753:Laboratories / Q000458:organization & administration*; D065006:Papanicolaou Test; D010338:Pathology, Clinical; D002583:Uterine Cervical Neoplasms / Q000473:pathology; D014626:Vaginal Smears