Reid colposcopic index evaluation: Comparison of general and oncologic gynecologists

The Reid colposcopic index (RCI) helps physicians for interpret the results of colposcopic examination. To compare the accuracy of RCI in colposcopic evaluation between general and oncologic gynecologists, this prospective trial was conducted by invited women over 20 years of age who were scheduled...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Apiwat Aue-Aungkul, Prapaporn Suprasert
Format: Journal
Published: 2018
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84937047131&origin=inward
http://cmuir.cmu.ac.th/jspui/handle/6653943832/54152
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Institution: Chiang Mai University
id th-cmuir.6653943832-54152
record_format dspace
spelling th-cmuir.6653943832-541522018-09-04T10:22:39Z Reid colposcopic index evaluation: Comparison of general and oncologic gynecologists Apiwat Aue-Aungkul Prapaporn Suprasert Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology Medicine The Reid colposcopic index (RCI) helps physicians for interpret the results of colposcopic examination. To compare the accuracy of RCI in colposcopic evaluation between general and oncologic gynecologists, this prospective trial was conducted by invited women over 20 years of age who were scheduled for a colposcopy at Chiang Mai University Hospital between August, 2008 and May, 2014 to participate. Pregnant patients or those having a history of hysterectomy or conization were excluded. During the colposcopy, all patients were simultaneously evaluated by general and oncologic gynecologists utilizing the RCI. Further management with either a biopsy or LEEP in each patient was dependent on the decision of the attending oncologic gynecologist. The accuracy of the RCI in diagnosing HSIL or more was calculated by the comparison with the final histology. Finally, 135 patients were recruited into this study. The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, and accuracy of RCI in diagnosing HSIL or more in general gynecologists were 45.2%, 80.7%, 41.1%, 83.2% and 72.6% while in the oncologic gynecologists were 51.6%, 85.6%, 51.6%, 85.6% and 77.8%, respectively. The difference in accuracy between evaluator groups was not significant (p-value=0.28). Of 3 patients with invasive cervical cancer, all were undetected by the general gynecologists using RCI while only 1 invasive cervical cancer was missed via RCI by the oncologic gynecologists. We conclude that RCI could be used by general gynecologists in provincial hospitals with major concerns about missing invasive cervical cancer. A short training period regarding colposcopy might help to resolve this problem. 2018-09-04T10:08:35Z 2018-09-04T10:08:35Z 2015-01-01 Journal 15137368 2-s2.0-84937047131 10.7314/APJCP.2015.16.12.5001 https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84937047131&origin=inward http://cmuir.cmu.ac.th/jspui/handle/6653943832/54152
institution Chiang Mai University
building Chiang Mai University Library
country Thailand
collection CMU Intellectual Repository
topic Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
Medicine
spellingShingle Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
Medicine
Apiwat Aue-Aungkul
Prapaporn Suprasert
Reid colposcopic index evaluation: Comparison of general and oncologic gynecologists
description The Reid colposcopic index (RCI) helps physicians for interpret the results of colposcopic examination. To compare the accuracy of RCI in colposcopic evaluation between general and oncologic gynecologists, this prospective trial was conducted by invited women over 20 years of age who were scheduled for a colposcopy at Chiang Mai University Hospital between August, 2008 and May, 2014 to participate. Pregnant patients or those having a history of hysterectomy or conization were excluded. During the colposcopy, all patients were simultaneously evaluated by general and oncologic gynecologists utilizing the RCI. Further management with either a biopsy or LEEP in each patient was dependent on the decision of the attending oncologic gynecologist. The accuracy of the RCI in diagnosing HSIL or more was calculated by the comparison with the final histology. Finally, 135 patients were recruited into this study. The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, and accuracy of RCI in diagnosing HSIL or more in general gynecologists were 45.2%, 80.7%, 41.1%, 83.2% and 72.6% while in the oncologic gynecologists were 51.6%, 85.6%, 51.6%, 85.6% and 77.8%, respectively. The difference in accuracy between evaluator groups was not significant (p-value=0.28). Of 3 patients with invasive cervical cancer, all were undetected by the general gynecologists using RCI while only 1 invasive cervical cancer was missed via RCI by the oncologic gynecologists. We conclude that RCI could be used by general gynecologists in provincial hospitals with major concerns about missing invasive cervical cancer. A short training period regarding colposcopy might help to resolve this problem.
format Journal
author Apiwat Aue-Aungkul
Prapaporn Suprasert
author_facet Apiwat Aue-Aungkul
Prapaporn Suprasert
author_sort Apiwat Aue-Aungkul
title Reid colposcopic index evaluation: Comparison of general and oncologic gynecologists
title_short Reid colposcopic index evaluation: Comparison of general and oncologic gynecologists
title_full Reid colposcopic index evaluation: Comparison of general and oncologic gynecologists
title_fullStr Reid colposcopic index evaluation: Comparison of general and oncologic gynecologists
title_full_unstemmed Reid colposcopic index evaluation: Comparison of general and oncologic gynecologists
title_sort reid colposcopic index evaluation: comparison of general and oncologic gynecologists
publishDate 2018
url https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84937047131&origin=inward
http://cmuir.cmu.ac.th/jspui/handle/6653943832/54152
_version_ 1681424267902713856