COMPARISON OF PAP SMEAR QUALITY WITH ANATOMICAL SPATULA METHOD AND THE COMMON METHOD (SPATULA-CYTOBRUSH): A SINGLE BLIND CLINICAL TRIAL

Q: How can I download an article?

To download an article from SID, first log in to the site, search for the article title, and click on the 'Download Article' option.

Q: How can I download an ISI article?

To download an ISI article on SID, enter the keyword or article title in the search bar, view the relevant results, click on the desired article, and select the 'Download Article' option.

Q: How can I access the SID database?

To access the SID database, visit SID.ir, create an account, and log in to access scientific resources.

Q: Is downloading articles from SID free?

Some articles on SID are available for free, while others require payment. Details are specified on the article's page.

SOLEIMANI M.; ABDALI KH.; KHAJEHEI M.; TABATABAEE H.R.; KOMAR P.V.; RIAZ MONTAZER N.

مرکز اطلاعات علمی Scientific Information Database (SID) - Trusted Source for Research and Academic Resources

Journal Paper

Paper Information

Journal: International Journal of Cancer Management Year:2012 | Volume:5 | Issue:1 Page(s): 33-38

Download Full-Text

View:

314

Download:

Cites:

Information Journal Paper

Title

COMPARISON OF PAP SMEAR QUALITY WITH ANATOMICAL SPATULA METHOD AND THE COMMON METHOD (SPATULA-CYTOBRUSH): A SINGLE BLIND CLINICAL TRIAL

Author(s)

Keywords

PAPANICOLAOU SMEAR

CERVICAL NEOPLASM

CLINICAL TRIAL

Abstract

Background: Cervical cancer is the third most common cancer in women in the world. PAPANICOLAOU SMEAR is known as a standard test for cervical cancer screening; however, the most important challenge is high rates of false negative results. The aim of this study was to compare the quality of smears obtained by anatomical spatula and spatula-cytobrush. The most important factor in false negative result is inappropriate tool of sampling.Methods: One hundred married women participated in this single blind CLINICAL TRIAL. All participants were interviewed; two samples were obtained from every participant: one with spatula-cytobrush and another one with anatomical spatula. All slides were encoded and were assessed by two pathologists. Then, data were analyzed by means of kappa coefficient.Results: Cell adequacy was 96.1 % in anatomical spatula method and 91.2 % in spatula-cytobrush method (p=0.016). The rates for endocervical cells and metaplasia cells in anatomical spatula method were 70.6% and 24.5% respectively and these amounts were 69.6% and 24.5% respectively in the spatula-cytobrush method (p<0.001). No one reported any pain and the amount of bleeding was 38.2% in both methods (P>0.05). Regarding infection and inflammatory reactions there was no statistically significant difference between two methods (p>0.05).Conclusion: Based on our findings in this study, results of sampling with anatomical spatula method were more acceptable and better than those with spatula-cytobrush sampling.

Cites

No record.

References

No record.

Cite

APA: Copy

SOLEIMANI, M., ABDALI, KH., KHAJEHEI, M., TABATABAEE, H.R., KOMAR, P.V., & RIAZ MONTAZER, N.. (2012). COMPARISON OF PAP SMEAR QUALITY WITH ANATOMICAL SPATULA METHOD AND THE COMMON METHOD (SPATULA-CYTOBRUSH): A SINGLE BLIND CLINICAL TRIAL. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CANCER MANAGEMENT (IRANIAN JOURNAL OF CANCER PREVENTION), 5(1), 33-38. SID. https://sid.ir/paper/312532/en

Vancouver: Copy

SOLEIMANI M., ABDALI KH., KHAJEHEI M., TABATABAEE H.R., KOMAR P.V., RIAZ MONTAZER N.. COMPARISON OF PAP SMEAR QUALITY WITH ANATOMICAL SPATULA METHOD AND THE COMMON METHOD (SPATULA-CYTOBRUSH): A SINGLE BLIND CLINICAL TRIAL. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CANCER MANAGEMENT (IRANIAN JOURNAL OF CANCER PREVENTION)[Internet]. 2012;5(1):33-38. Available from: https://sid.ir/paper/312532/en

IEEE: Copy

M. SOLEIMANI, KH. ABDALI, M. KHAJEHEI, H.R. TABATABAEE, P.V. KOMAR, and N. RIAZ MONTAZER, “COMPARISON OF PAP SMEAR QUALITY WITH ANATOMICAL SPATULA METHOD AND THE COMMON METHOD (SPATULA-CYTOBRUSH): A SINGLE BLIND CLINICAL TRIAL,” INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CANCER MANAGEMENT (IRANIAN JOURNAL OF CANCER PREVENTION), vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 33–38, 2012, [Online]. Available: https://sid.ir/paper/312532/en

Related Journal Papers

No record.

Related Seminar Papers

No record.

Related Plans

No record.

Recommended Workshops