BACKGROUND: Papanicolaou (Pap) testing has transitioned from conventional preparations (CPs) to liquid-based preparations (LBPs) because of the perceived superiority of LBPs. Many studies conclude that LBPs reduce unsatisfactory Pap tests; however, some believe that the evidence substantiating this claim is weak. The authors studied the effect of the transition from CPs to LBPs on the proportion of unsatisfactory Pap tests in 4 health care systems in the United States participating in the National Institutes of Health-funded Screening Effectiveness and Research in Community-Based Healthcare (SEARCH) project. METHODS: The study cohort consisted of 548,174 women ages 21 to 65 years who had 1443,725 total Pap tests between 2000 and 2010. Segmented regression analysis was used to estimate the effect of adopting LBPs on the proportion of unsatisfactory Pap tests after adjusting for age. RESULTS: Three sites that implemented SurePath LBP experienced significant reductions in unsatisfactory Pap tests (estimated effect: site 1, -2.46%; 95% confidence interval [CI], -1.47%, -3.45%; site 2, -1.78%; 95% CI, -1.54%, -2.02%; site 3, -8.25%; 95% CI, -7.33%, -9.17%). The fourth site that implemented ThinPrep LBP did not experience a reduction in unsatisfactory Pap tests. The relative risk of an unsatisfactory Pap test in women aged ≥ 50 years increased after the transition to LBPs (SurePath: relative risk, 2.1; 95% CI, 1.9-2.2; ThinPrep: relative risk, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.5-2.0). CONCLUSIONS: The observed changes in the proportion of unsatisfactory Pap tests varied across the participating sites and depended on the type of LBP technology, the age of women, and the rates before the implementation of this technology.
BACKGROUND: Papanicolaou (Pap) testing has transitioned from conventional preparations (CPs) to liquid-based preparations (LBPs) because of the perceived superiority of LBPs. Many studies conclude that LBPs reduce unsatisfactory Pap tests; however, some believe that the evidence substantiating this claim is weak. The authors studied the effect of the transition from CPs to LBPs on the proportion of unsatisfactory Pap tests in 4 health care systems in the United States participating in the National Institutes of Health-funded Screening Effectiveness and Research in Community-Based Healthcare (SEARCH) project. METHODS: The study cohort consisted of 548,174 women ages 21 to 65 years who had 1443,725 total Pap tests between 2000 and 2010. Segmented regression analysis was used to estimate the effect of adopting LBPs on the proportion of unsatisfactory Pap tests after adjusting for age. RESULTS: Three sites that implemented SurePath LBP experienced significant reductions in unsatisfactory Pap tests (estimated effect: site 1, -2.46%; 95% confidence interval [CI], -1.47%, -3.45%; site 2, -1.78%; 95% CI, -1.54%, -2.02%; site 3, -8.25%; 95% CI, -7.33%, -9.17%). The fourth site that implemented ThinPrep LBP did not experience a reduction in unsatisfactory Pap tests. The relative risk of an unsatisfactory Pap test in women aged ≥ 50 years increased after the transition to LBPs (SurePath: relative risk, 2.1; 95% CI, 1.9-2.2; ThinPrep: relative risk, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.5-2.0). CONCLUSIONS: The observed changes in the proportion of unsatisfactory Pap tests varied across the participating sites and depended on the type of LBP technology, the age of women, and the rates before the implementation of this technology.
Authors: Amy L Adams; Jonathan Gidley; Janie Roberson; Wenquan Wang; Isam Eltoum; David C Chhieng Journal: Am J Clin Pathol Date: 2005-05 Impact factor: 2.493
Authors: Elizabeth Davey; Alexandra Barratt; Les Irwig; Siew F Chan; Petra Macaskill; Patricia Mannes; A Marion Saville Journal: Lancet Date: 2006-01-14 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Mark C Hornbrook; Gene Hart; Jennifer L Ellis; Donald J Bachman; Gary Ansell; Sarah M Greene; Edward H Wagner; Roy Pardee; Mark M Schmidt; Ann Geiger; Amy L Butani; Terry Field; Hassan Fouayzi; Irina Miroshnik; Liyan Liu; Robert Diseker; Karen Wells; Rick Krajenta; Lois Lamerato; Christine Neslund Dudas Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr Date: 2005
Authors: Edward H Wagner; Sarah M Greene; Gene Hart; Terry S Field; Suzanne Fletcher; Ann M Geiger; Lisa J Herrinton; Mark C Hornbrook; Christine C Johnson; Judy Mouchawar; Sharon J Rolnick; Victor J Stevens; Stephen H Taplin; Dennis Tolsma; Thomas M Vogt Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr Date: 2005
Authors: Christopher L Owens; Diana S M Buist; Daniel Peterson; Aruna Kamineni; Sheila Weinmann; Tyler Ross; Andrew E Williams; Azadeh Stark; Kenneth F Adams; Chyke A Doubeni; Terry S Field Journal: Cancer Cytopathol Date: 2014-10-23 Impact factor: 5.284