ASCCP Colposcopy Standards: Colposcopy Quality Improvement Recommendations for the United States
- PMID: 28953113
- PMCID: PMC5678988
- DOI: 10.1097/LGT.0000000000000342
ASCCP Colposcopy Standards: Colposcopy Quality Improvement Recommendations for the United States
Abstract
Objectives: The American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology (ASCCP) Colposcopy Standards recommendations address the role of and approach to colposcopy and biopsy for cervical cancer prevention in the United States. The recommendations were developed by an expert working group appointed by ASCCP's Board of Directors. The ASCCP Quality Improvement Working Group developed evidence-based guidelines to promote best practices and reduce errors in colposcopy and recommended indicators to measure colposcopy quality.
Materials and methods: The working group performed a systematic review of existing major society and national guidelines and quality indicators. An initial list of potential quality indicators was developed and refined through successive iterative discussions, and draft quality indicators were proposed. The draft recommendations were then reviewed and commented on by the entire Colposcopy Standards Committee, posted online for public comment, and presented at the International Federation for Cervical Pathology and Colposcopy 2017 World Congress for further comment. All comments were considered, additional adjustments made, and the final recommendations approved by the entire Task Force.
Results: Eleven quality indicators were selected spanning documentation, biopsy protocols, and time intervals between index screening tests and completion of diagnostic evaluation.
Conclusions: The proposed quality indicators are intended to serve as a starting point for quality improvement in colposcopy at a time when colposcopy volume is decreasing and individual procedures are becoming technically more difficult to perform.
Conflict of interest statement
Disclosure Statement: Drs. Mayeaux, Novetsky, Chelmow, Garcia, Liu, Papasozomenos, Khan, Huh, Wentzensen, Massad, Waxman, and Conageski report no conflicts of interest.
References
-
- Donabedian A. Evaluating the quality of medical care. [Accessed 12/30/16];Milbank Mem Fund Q. 1966 Jul;44(3 Suppl):166–206. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/5338568. - PubMed
-
- Kapur N, Parand A, Soukup T, Reader T, Sevdalis N. Aviation and healthcare: a comparative review with implications for patient safety. [Accessed 12/30/16];JRSM Open. 2016 7(1) 2054270415616548. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4710114/ - PMC - PubMed
-
- Institute of Medicine. To Err is Human: Building a Safer Health System. In: Kohn L, Corrigan J, Donaldson M, editors. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 1999. http://www.nationalacademies.org/hmd/~/media/Files/Report%20Files/1999/T.... - PubMed
-
- Britain 2016. NHS Cervical Screening Programme: Colposcopy and Programme Management. [Accessed 10/09/16];2016 https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/fil....
-
- Australia 2005. Screening to Prevent Cervical Cancer: Guidelines for the Management of Asymptomatic Women with Screen Detected Abnormalities, National Cancer Screening Program. [Accessed 10/09/16];2005 https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/fil....
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical