100% rapid (partial) rescreening for quality assurance

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficiency of two methods fur routine quality ass urance in gynecologic cytology: smears and rapid rescreening of all negativ e gynecologic smears. STUDY DESIGN: All gynecologic smears considered to be negative or benign an d diagnosed between November 1, 1996, and December 31, 1997, were rescreene d using the rapid, partial rescreening technique. Results were compared to those of the 10% random rescreening method. RESULTS: Comparing the 10% review of negatives to the rapid rescreening in two comparable periods of thee months, the former required review by the su pervisor of 160 cases in order to find a true false negative. With rapid ei ght cases to find a true false negative. Also, rapid rescreening found abou t four times more true false negatives than random 10% review. CONCLUSION: Rapid rescreening of all negative gynecologic smears proved mor e efficient than 10% random rescreening.