You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT JAMA
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 283 No. 10, March 8, 2000 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  JAMA
  •  Online Features
  Research Letters
 This Article
 •Full text
 •PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citing articles on Web of Science (4)
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Similar articles in JAMA
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

Follow-up of Unsatisfactory Papanicolaou Test Results

Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

To the Editor: Use of the Papanicolaou (Pap) test has resulted in a 6- to 10-fold decline in the rate of invasive cervical cancer in screened populations.1 The Bethesda System (TBS) was developed in 1988 and revised in 1991 to clarify the varied terminology for cytological findings.2-3 An important aspect of TBS is the evaluation of the specimen for adequacy, which is reported as satisfactory, satisfactory but limited (with description), or unsatisfactory. Retrospective studies have indicated that unsatisfactory Pap test results are associated with a high incidence of subsequent cervical malignancy or premalignant epithelial abnormalities.4-6 By judging the adequacy of the Pap test, TBS aims to decrease false-negative reports. Due to concerns that introduction of TBS terminology has confused practitioners and resulted in inadequate follow-up of abnormal test results, we reviewed the management of patients at a major teaching institution who had Pap test results that were diagnosed as "unsatisfactory . . . [Full Text of this Article]

Methods



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter     What's this?





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 2000 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.