title: Evaluation of 100% rapid rescreening of negative cervical smears as a quality assurance measure.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  The objective of this study was to compare the performance of 100% rapid rescreening, 10% random rescreening and the review of smears selected on the basis of clinical criteria, as a method of internal quality control of cervical smears classified as negative during routine screening.
  
  
  METHODS
  A total of 3149 smears were analysed, 173 of which were classified as positive and 2887 as negative, while 89 smears were considered unsatisfactory. The smears classified as negative were submitted to 100% rapid rescreening, 10% random rescreening, and rescreening based on clinical criteria. The rescreening stages were blinded and results were classified according to the Bethesda 2001 terminology. Six cytologists participated in this study, two of whom were responsible for routine screening while the other four alternated in carrying out rescreening so that no individual reviewed the same slide more than once.
  
  
  RESULTS
  The 100% rapid rescreening method identified 92 suspect smears, of which 42 were considered positive at final diagnosis. Of the 289 smears submitted to the 10% rescreening method, four were considered abnormal but only one was confirmed positive in the final diagnosis. Of the 690 smears rescreened on the basis of clinical criteria, 10 were considered abnormal and eight received a positive final diagnosis.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The 100% rapid rescreening method is more efficient at detecting false-negative results than 10% random rescreening or rescreening on the basis of clinical criteria, and is recommended as an internal quality control method.
authors.affiliation: School of Pharmacy, Federal University of Goiás, Goiânia, Goiás, Brazil.
authors.forename: E J C
authors.initials: EJ
authors.lastname: Manrique
authors.forename: R G
authors.initials: RG
authors.lastname: Amaral
authors.forename: N L A
authors.initials: NL
authors.lastname: Souza
authors.forename: S B N
authors.initials: SB
authors.lastname: Tavares
authors.forename: Z B P
authors.initials: ZB
authors.lastname: Albuquerque
authors.forename: L C
authors.initials: LC
authors.lastname: Zeferino
mesh_terms: D001938:Brazil / Q000453:epidemiology; D005188:False Negative Reactions; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008403:Mass Screening / Q000379:methods* / Q000592:standards; D011786:Quality Control; D002583:Uterine Cervical Neoplasms / Q000175:diagnosis / Q000453:epidemiology / Q000473:pathology*; D014626:Vaginal Smears / Q000379:methods* / Q000592:standards