Revista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetricia : revista da Federacao Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetricia · 2017
Comparison of Cervicovaginal Cytopathological Samples Collected in Basic Health Units and in Private Clinics in the Midwest of Santa Catarina.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Dallazem Bárbara, Dambrós Bibiana Paula, Gamba Conrado de Oliveira, Perazzoli Marcelo, Kirschnick Alexandre
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To compare the quality of cervicovaginal samples obtained from basic health units (BHUs) of the Unified Health System (SUS) and those obtained from private clinics to screen precursor lesions of cervical cancer.
METHODS: It was an intervention study whose investigated variables were: adequacy of the samples; presence of epithelia in the samples, and cytopathological results. A total of 940 forms containing the analysis of the biological samples were examined: 470 forms of women attended at BHUs of the SUS and 470 forms of women examined in private clinics in January and February of 2016.
RESULTS: All the unsatisfactory samples were collected at BHUs and corresponded to 4% of the total in this sector (p < 0.0001). There was a higher percentage of samples containing only squamous cells in the SUS (43.9%). There was squamocolumnar junction (SJC) representativeness in 82.1% of the samples from the private clinics (p < 0.0001). Regarding negative results for intraepithelial lesions and/or malignancies, the percentages obtained were 95.9% and 99.1% (p < 0.0049) in the exams collected in the private system and SUS, respectively. Less serious lesions corresponded to 0.89% of the samples from the SUS and 2.56% of the tests from the private sector; more serious lesions were not represented in the samples obtained from BHUs, whereas the percentage was 1.49% in private institutions.
CONCLUSION: Unsatisfactory cervical samples were observed only in exams performed at the SUS. There is a need for guidance and training of professionals who perform this procedure to achieve higher reliability in the results and more safety for women who undergo this preventive test.
METHODS: It was an intervention study whose investigated variables were: adequacy of the samples; presence of epithelia in the samples, and cytopathological results. A total of 940 forms containing the analysis of the biological samples were examined: 470 forms of women attended at BHUs of the SUS and 470 forms of women examined in private clinics in January and February of 2016.
RESULTS: All the unsatisfactory samples were collected at BHUs and corresponded to 4% of the total in this sector (p < 0.0001). There was a higher percentage of samples containing only squamous cells in the SUS (43.9%). There was squamocolumnar junction (SJC) representativeness in 82.1% of the samples from the private clinics (p < 0.0001). Regarding negative results for intraepithelial lesions and/or malignancies, the percentages obtained were 95.9% and 99.1% (p < 0.0049) in the exams collected in the private system and SUS, respectively. Less serious lesions corresponded to 0.89% of the samples from the SUS and 2.56% of the tests from the private sector; more serious lesions were not represented in the samples obtained from BHUs, whereas the percentage was 1.49% in private institutions.
CONCLUSION: Unsatisfactory cervical samples were observed only in exams performed at the SUS. There is a need for guidance and training of professionals who perform this procedure to achieve higher reliability in the results and more safety for women who undergo this preventive test.