Intended for healthcare professionals
Guideline

Expert consensus on quality control of colposcopy

Cervical cancer is one of the main malignant tumours threatening women’s health. In 2022, there were 661 000 new cases and 348 000 deaths from cervical cancer worldwide.1 In China, there were about 150 700 new cases and 55 700 deaths from cervical cancer in 2022.2

Cervical cancer screening is one of the main preventive measures for cervical cancer. Colposcopy is an essential tool for further examination in cases where abnormalities are detected during cervical cancer screening. The colposcopy impression is also a significant indicator for assessing the risk of cervical precancerous lesions or invasive cervical cancer.3 High-quality colposcopy can enhance the accuracy of risk assessment, thereby enabling standardised management of individuals with abnormal findings. Therefore, ensuring the quality of colposcopy is crucial and has a direct impact on the overall quality of cervical cancer screening. Due to uneven development across different regions in China, varying medical standards and differences in training and practice among colposcopy professionals, diagnostic and treatment capabilities vary widely, which, to some extent, affects the quality of colposcopy. To standardise the implementation and operation of colposcopy and to promote high-quality cervical cancer prevention and control efforts, experts have compiled this consensus, hoping to provide a reference for professionals involved in colposcopy and management.

This consensus document was reached through discussions by the expert group after a comprehensive review of relevant guidelines and documents, both domestically and internationally, taking into account the domestic situation. The main content focuses on establishing indicators for quality control for colposcopy examination. Applicable institutions can refer to this consensus to conduct internal and external quality assessments of colposcopy, or develop quality control indicators which are suitable for local areas or institutions. The ultimate goal is to improve the quality of cervical cancer prevention and promote the development of the discipline within the institution.

Requirements for management, professional, staff and environmental equipment of colposcopy

It is necessary to establish a colposcopy operation guideline, which should include examination environment and equipment, professional staff capacity and operational standards.4–8

Developing and improving relevant rules and regulations

In health facilities or local areas, it should develop relevant rules and regulations which include management for colposcopy rooms, operational standards for colposcopy, management standards for cervical lesions, case registration and follow-up, discussion for difficult cases, multidisciplinary consultation and quality control.

Professional staff

Staff

It is recommended that at least two professional colposcopy physicians and at least one nurse should be equipped in the specialised outpatient clinic for colposcopy.

Qualifications

Colposcopy specialists should have at least 3 years of clinical experience in obstetrics and gynaecology and have more than 1 year of practical experience in colposcopy (colposcopy specialists should conduct ≥150 cases/year, which have abnormal cervical cancer screening results). Alternatively, they should have completed at least 3 months of specialised training in colposcopy before conducting a colposcopy examination. The training qualification rate for colposcopy specialists should be ≥95%.

Training

Colposcopy specialists should receive regular training on the theory and practical operation every 2–3 years.

Environment and equipment requirements

Environment

Appropriate clinics should be provided according to the actual working conditions of the institution, and patient privacy should be ensured, and relevant cleaning and sterility requirements should be met.

Equipment

The equipment should include devices related to colposcopy and treatment, such as gynaecological examination beds and colposcopes, which should be in functional condition. In addition, other equipment should be configured according to actual needs, such as filing cabinets, reagent cabinets, operating tables and air disinfection equipment. A hazardous chemical storage cabinet must be provided and managed according to relevant regulations.9

Reagents

Normal saline, 3%–5% acetic acid, 5% compound iodine solution and other essential reagents.

Evaluation contents and indicators of colposcopy operation

The colposcopy procedure should be standardised. For professional colposcopy physicians, their indications and procedures can be assessed by reviewing colposcopy records or observing their actual colposcopy operations (table 1). Internal evaluations should regularly involve senior doctors from the institution randomly selecting 10% of colposcopy cases. External evaluations are conducted by an expert panel reviewing a period of colposcopy records and 10–20 colposcopy records to assess the compliance with indications, the procedural flow of colposcopy and the standardisation of colposcopy reports8 10–16 (table 2).

Table 1
Evaluation form for colposcopy operation and record
Table 2
Indicators for evaluation of colposcopy

Indications for colposcopy

The indications for colposcopy should be correct,5 6 and 100% should be recorded. The proportion of colposcopy evaluations that meet the indications should be ≥80%.

The specific indicators are as follows:

Abnormal cervical cancer screening results

  1. Human papilloma virus (HPV) 16 or 18 positive, or other HPV high-risk subtypes persistently positive.

  2. Cytology exam from Bethesda system (The Bethesda System) indicating low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (LSIL), atypical squamous cells-cannot exclude high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL) (ASC-H), HSIL, squamous cell carcinoma, atypical glandular cell (AGC), adenocarcinoma in situ (AIS), and adenocarcinoma, or ASC of undetermined significance with positive HPV test.

Abnormal clinical findings

  1. Suspicious cervical ulcer, tumour, or polyp or suspected cancer by clinical exam.

  2. Unexplained lower genital tract bleeding or contact bleeding, unexplained vaginal discharge, etc.

Vulvar and vaginal HPV-related squamous epithelial lesions

Follow-up after treatment of precancerous lesions of the lower genital tract

Colposcopy operation

Colposcopy should be performed according to the guidelines,6 8 17 with the operation standard rate being ≥90%. The specific operation should meet the following steps:

Observation and evaluation

The patient is placed in the lithotomy position. After examining the external genitalia and perianal area, an appropriately sized speculum is inserted to observe the appearance of the entire vagina and cervix. The cervix and vaginal epithelium are moistened with physiological saline to remove mucus, facilitating observation and assessment. The observations and assessments should include the following:

Observation and documentation of the adequacy of colposcopy

The cervix should be fully exposed under the colposcope, and factors affecting the colposcopy should be assessed, such as bleeding, inflammation, scarring, etc. The visibility of the upper boundary of the cervical squamous columnar junction (SCJ) and the upper boundary of the lesion, as well as the type of transformation zone (TZ), should be assessed and recorded.

The proportion of colposcopy documentation evaluated to assess the adequacy of colposcopy should be ≥90%.12

Observation and documentation of the visibility of SCJ and TZ types

Cervical SCJ is the position where cervical squamous epithelial cells and columnar epithelial cells are adjacent, and the TZ is the area between the original SCJ and the new SCJ, where cervical cancer is prone to occur. Therefore, it is very important to evaluate and record whether SCJ is visible and to evaluate TZ types.16 18 19

American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology (ASCCP) recommends that ≥90% of colposcopy cases should record SCJ visibility,8 while the European Union recommends 100% should be recorded.11 Considering the actual situation in China, this consensus suggests that the proportion of colposcopy reports recording SCJ visibility and TZ type should be ≥90%.

Acetic acid test

Cover the vaginal and cervical areas of the cervix with a cotton ball soaked in 3%–5% acetic acid for 60 s. Then, determining the TZ types and observing the changes in the cervical and vaginal epithelium and blood vessels under both low and high magnification. For Type 2 and 3 TZs, using an endocervical speculum or other instruments to observe the TZ and the upper boundary of the lesion. Slowly rotate the speculum to ensure that the anterior and posterior walls, as well as the lateral walls of the vagina, are fully visible. If necessary during the examination, repeat the acetic acid application after 3–4 min. When required, use 5% compound iodine solution for staining.

The changes in cervical epithelium and blood vessels observed under colposcopy after the acetic acid test should be recorded. Acetic acid can undergo a reversible reaction with keratin and nuclear proteins within epithelial cells; the acetic acid test is an important method for assessing whether there are any abnormalities in the cervix.6 The acetic acid test is a necessary procedure in colposcopy, and the colposcopist should document the results of the acetic acid test, including the colour, borders, contours, duration, degree and location of the acetic acid-stained epithelium, to facilitate impression judgement during colposcopy and determine whether a biopsy is needed. The proportion of colposcopy records of the acetic acid test should be 100%.

A thorough observation of the lesion’s extent is crucial for assessing its severity and determining further management. The 2011 International Federation for Cervical Pathology and Colposcopy recommends recording the location of the lesion, the visibility of its borders, the area affected, the quadrants involved and the relationship between the lesion and TZ, or other details.12

The proportion of documented lesions should be ≥70%.

Documentation of colposcopy impression

The detection rates of HSIL and higher (HSIL+), including cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) 2, CIN3, AIS and invasive cervical cancer, are closely related to colposcopy impression. ASCCP uses colposcopy impressions as one of the risk stratification indicators.15

Colposcopy impression should be determined based on changes in the cervical epithelium and blood vessels. The findings should be described using relevant colposcopic terminology, including (normal/benign; low grade; high grade; cancer). Additionally, the assessment impressions of the vagina, vulva, perianal area and other regions should also be documented.

The proportion of documentation of colposcopy impression should be ≥80%.

Biopsy

For any abnormalities found by a colposcopy exam, a biopsy should be performed to confirm the diagnosis through histopathology. Common biopsy methods used in colposcopy include targeted biopsies and endocervical curettage (ECC). Samples from different areas should be labelled separately and fixed in 10% neutral formalin solution before being sent for pathological examination. The documentation of colposcopy should indicate whether a biopsy was performed, and if so, the method and site of the biopsy should be recorded.

The proportion of biopsy procedures with documentation of colposcopy should be ≥90%.

Colposcopy-directed punch biopsies

Biopsy should be performed at 2–4 biopsy sites in any discontinuous acetic acid-stained area or suspicious lesion. If only one biopsy is taken from the most severe lesion, it may miss up to one-third of precancerous lesions; multiple-site biopsies can increase the detection rate of HSIL+.20 It is recommended to take 2–4 samples to enhance the detection rate of HSIL+, and to document the sampling sites for histopathological diagnosis and subsequent treatment.8

For cases with abnormal cervical cancer screening results but no abnormalities found on colposcopy, random biopsy can increase the detection rate of precancerous lesions of cervical cancer,20 21 especially for patients with ASC-H, HSIL or AGC. It is recommended to evaluate patients who have no abnormalities on colposcopy and without vaginal lesions based on age, previous cervical cancer screening history, treatment status and current cervical cancer screening results. If necessary, random biopsies of all four quadrants of the cervix can be performed.

Endocervical curettage

A colposcopy exam cannot adequately assess abnormalities of the cervical canal; performing ECC can help understand the condition of lesions within the cervical canal, especially when TZ is not visible, making ECC examination particularly necessary.22 23 Decisions on whether to perform ECC should be based on screening results, history of precancerous lesion treatments, colposcopy impression and TZ type. It is important to note that pregnancy is contraindicated for ECC, and the indications for ECC are as follows6:

  1. TZ cannot be fully visible.

  2. Having high-risk factors (≥40 years old, cytology results were ASC-H, HSIL, AGC or AIS and HPV16/18 positive).

  3. Having HSIL+ treatment history.

  4. Following up with HSIL (CIN2), etc.

  5. ECC may not be performed in the following situations: (1) Cervical resection is planned; (2) The cervical canal cannot be entered with a curette and (3) Cytology exam is ASCUS or LSIL and age <30 years of non-childbearing women.

Haemostasis

After biopsy, press the biopsy site with a cotton ball. If there is active bleeding, use gauze with a tail to press the wound, and instruct the patient to remove it by themselves after 4 hours. Also, it can use haemostatic drugs to press the wound.

Documentation of colposcopy findings

Colposcopy findings should be documented (table 1).

Providing management recommendations

Explain the results to the patient, and make more detailed management suggestions for colposcopy, follow-up time, and guidance for nursing after discharge according to the specific conditions of the patient (such as age, fertility requirements, immune status, etc), and document.

After a colposcopy evaluation, further management recommendations should be provided. For patients with completely normal colposcopy results and low-risk screening who have not undergone biopsies, the time and content of follow-up should be communicated. Patients who undergo biopsies should be scheduled for a return visit within 2 weeks to inform them about the pathology results and to develop a subsequent treatment or follow-up plan. In conjunction with lifestyle factors (such as smoking, sexual behaviour and contraception), personalised health guidance should be provided, such as vaccination, to reduce the risk of cervical cancer.

The proportion of management recommendations documentation of colposcopy should be 100%.

The biopsy specimen meets the requirements of pathological preparation.

The biopsy specimen should be taken with colposcopy operation specifications, and the sampling site should be marked in detail. When conditions permit, it is recommended that specimens from different sampling sites be placed in different pathological bottles containing 10% neutral formalin, respectively, so as to better identify the degree of lesions in different sites.

The proportion of biopsy specimens that meet the requirements of pathological preparation should be ≥90%.12

Evaluation contents and indicators of management after colposcopy

The management after colposcopy involves colposcopy referral, return visit, and follow-up after colposcopy, and concordance rate between colposcopy and histopathology. Therefore, corresponding management indicators are also needed to understand the management situation and quality of colposcopy after a colposcopy exam through regular internal and external evaluation (table 2).

Consistency rate of colposcopy examination documentation

The documentation of colposcopy should be standardised, and the compliance rate with the evaluation of quality control experts should be ≥80%.

The concordance rate between high-grade lesions on colposcopy impression and pathological results

In cases with high-grade lesions on colposcopy impression, the proportion of HSIL+histopathological results of colposcopy biopsy should be ≥65%.

Follow-up rate after colposcopy

Those who are recommended to follow up after colposcopy should be conducted within 6–12 months, and the follow-up rate should be ≥80%.

Return rate after colposcopy

Return rate after colposcopy biopsy

After the histopathological results of the colposcopy biopsy are reported, the patients who have undergone the biopsy should be arranged to return for follow-up, and the return rate should be ≥80%. The management plan should be formulated according to the cervical cancer screening results, colposcopy impression, biopsy results and cervical screening history or other clinical records.

The rate of medical notification for biopsy pathology HSIL+

For patients with HSIL+ diagnosed by histopathology of colposcopy biopsy, the proportion of those who were notified within 2 weeks and urged to seek medical treatment as soon as possible should be 100%.

Treatment rate for HSIL+

According to the WHO target for the elimination of cervical cancer,24 it is recommended that the treatment rate for HSIL+ diagnosis should be ≥90%.

Follow-up rate after treatment of HSIL+

For HSIL+ patients who have been diagnosed by histopathology, regular follow-up should be conducted after treatment to detect residual/recurrence or progression to invasive cervical cancer as early as possible. The follow-up rate should be ≥90%, and the follow-up should be at least 25 years.

Further research or problems to be improved

To further explore the scientific and feasibility of quality control indicators of colposcopy

The quality control of colposcopy is crucial for the high-quality implementation of cervical cancer prevention and control efforts. Some developed countries have successively established quality control indicators for colposcopy based on local conditions, covering various aspects such as personnel involved in colposcopy, technical operations and management.11 13 25 26 Currently, China also has relevant requirements for the quality control of colposcopy, but some indicators lack supporting evidence. Therefore, it is urgently necessary to further conduct applied research to explore the scientific validity, appropriateness and feasibility of implementing colposcopy quality control indicators in China.

Explore the application of artificial intelligence (AI), the internet and other new technologies to the quality control of colposcopy.

With the development of computer technology and the internet, AI technology is increasingly being applied in medical scenarios. Currently, AI-assisted cervical cytology diagnosis technology has gradually been implemented in actual cervical cancer screening work. The AI-assisted colposcopy diagnostic system is also under development,27 which will further promote the high-quality and efficient conduct of cervical cancer prevention and control efforts. At the same time, internet and AI technologies can also be used for quality control in colposcopy exams, including personnel training, remote consultations for colposcopy examinations, intelligent quality control of the system, online evaluations and data statistics. In the future, more exploration can be conducted in these areas to help improve the quality of cervical cancer screening and the efficiency of quality assessment.

Further establish an information sharing system to understand relevant indicators in real time

In colposcopy, besides standardising the examination process and diagnosing and treating patients, long-term management and follow-up of patients after colposcopy are also crucial. It is recommended to explore information sharing and interconnectivity among different medical institutions for patients with precancerous cervical lesions or cervical cancer after treatment, to achieve the acquisition, sharing and dynamic management of relevant clinical diagnosis and follow-up data.

Compiling expert group

Xiaosong Zhang (Peking University First Hospital), Hui Bi (Peking University First Hospital), Gengli Zhao (Maternal and Child Health Center of Peking University), Linhong Wang (Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention), Di Gao (Peking University First Hospital), Qingping Zhao (Sichuan Provincial Maternity and Child Health Care Hospital), Chao Zhao (Peking University People’s Hospital), Ke You (Peking University Third Hospital), Jun Liu (Beijing Chao-Yang Hospital, Capital Medical University), Mingzhu Li (Peking University People’s Hospital)

Reviewing expert group (in alphabetical order)

Chuqiang Shu (The Maternity and Child Health Hospital of Hunan Province), Fei Chen (Peking Union Medical College Hospital), Jiancui Chen (Fujian Maternity and Child Health Hospital), Jie Chen (Harbin Medical University Cancer Hospital), Jun Yang (Women and Children’s Hospital of Chongqing Medical University), Lan Mi (Peking University First Hospital), Lihui Wei (Peking University People’s Hospital), Li Geng (Peking University Third Hospital), Long Sui (Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital of Fudan University), Tingyan Liu (Guangdong Women and Children Hospital), Xiaoli Wang (Hainan Women and Children’s Medical Center), Xufeng Wu (Maternal and Child Health Hospital of Hubei Province), Yan Zhang (Peking University First Hospital), Yongxin Zhao (Qinghai Maternity and Child Health Hospital), Yun Zhao (Peking University People’s Hospital), Yuanying Ma (Women’s Hospital School of Medicine Zhejiang University), Zhaoyang Liu (Northwest Women and Children’s Hospital), Zhixin Lin (Maternal and Child Health Hospital of Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region), Zhixue You (Jiangsu Province Hospital and Nanjing Medical University First Affiliated Hospital).

  • Contributors: The concept of this work was developed by HB, GZ, XZ, LWa and LWe. The initial draft of the manuscript was written by HB, GZ, XZ, QZ and DG. The manuscript was reviewed and revised by KY, CZ, JL and ML. All authors approved the final version of the manuscript.

  • Funding: The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

  • Competing interests: LWe served as an advisory committee memberof GOCM. LWa has served as the editorial members of GOCM.

    All otherauthors declare no competing interests

  • Patient and public involvement: Patients and/or the public were not involved in the design, or conduct, or reporting, or dissemination plans of this research.

  • Provenance and peer review: Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

Ethics statements

Patient consent for publication:
Ethics approval:

Not applicable.

  1. close Bray F, Laversanne M, Sung H, et al. Global cancer statistics 2022: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin 2024; 74:229–63.
  2. close Sun K, Han B, Zeng H, et al. Incidence and mortality of cancers in female genital organs - China, 2022. China CDC Wkly 2024; 6:195–202.
  3. close Egemen D, Cheung LC, Chen X, et al. Risk estimates supporting the 2019 ASCCP risk-based management consensus guidelines. J Low Genit Tract Dis 2020; 24:132–43.
  4. close General Office of the National Health Commission. Notice on the issuance of the work plan of cervical cancer screening and breast cancer screening. 2021;
    Available: here
  5. close China Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Maternal and Child Health Care Center. Cervical cancer screening quality assessment manual. 2022;
    Available: here
  6. close Wang LH, Zhao GL. Comprehensive prevention and control guidelines for cervical cancer. Beijing, People’s Medical Publishing House 2023;
  7. close Wei LH, Wu JL. Guidelines for quality assurance and control of cervical cancer screening. Beijing, People’s Medical Publishing House 2015;
  8. close Chen F, You ZX, Sui L, et al. Chinese expert consensus on the application of colposcopy. Chin J Obstet Gynecol 2020; 55:443–9.
  9. close General Office of the State Administration of Work Safety. Notice on the issuance of the implementation guide (trial) of the catalogue of hazardous chemicals (2015 edition) by the general office of the state administration of work safety. 2015;
    Available: here
  10. close Wentzensen N, Massad LS, Mayeaux EJ, et al. Evidence-based consensus recommendations for colposcopy practice for cervical cancer prevention in the United States. J Low Genit Tract Dis 2017; 21:216–22.
  11. close Mayeaux EJ, Novetsky AP, Chelmow D, et al. ASCCP colposcopy standards: Colposcopy quality improvement recommendations for the United States. J Low Genit Tract Dis 2017; 21:242–8.
  12. close Bornstein J, Bentley J, Bösze P, et al. 2011 colposcopic terminology of the International Federation for Cervical Pathology and Colposcopy. Obstet Gynecol 2012; 120:166–72.
  13. close Petry KU, Nieminen PJ, Leeson SC, et al. 2017 update of the European Federation for Colposcopy (EFC) performance standards for the practice of colposcopy. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2018; 224:137–41.
  14. close Cheung LC, Egemen D, Chen X, et al. 2019 ASCCP risk-based management consensus guidelines: Methods for risk estimation, recommended management, and validation. J Low Genit Tract Dis 2020; 24:90–101.
  15. close Perkins RB, Guido RS, Castle PE, et al. 2019 ASCCP risk-based management consensus guidelines committee. 2019 ASCCP risk-based management consensus guidelines for abnormal cervical cancer screening tests and cancer precursors. J Low Genit Tract Dis 2020; 24:102–31.
  16. close Herfs M, Yamamoto Y, Laury A, et al. A discrete population of squamocolumnar junction cells implicated in the pathogenesis of cervical cancer. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2012; 109:10516–21.
  17. close Wei LH, Zhao Y. Modern colposcopy. Peking University Medical Press 2016;
  18. close Herfs M, Parra-Herran C, Howitt BE, et al. Cervical squamocolumnar junction-specific markers define distinct, clinically relevant subsets of low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions. Am J Surg Pathol 2013; 37:1311–8.
  19. close Mirkovic J, Howitt BE, Roncarati P, et al. Carcinogenic HPV infection in the cervical squamo-columnar junction. J Pathol 2015; 236:265–71.
  20. close Song Y, Zhao Y-Q, Zhang X, et al. Random biopsy in colposcopy-negative quadrant is not effective in women with positive colposcopy in practice. Cancer Epidemiol 2015; 39:237–41.
  21. close Hu S-Y, Zhang W-H, Li S-M, et al. Pooled analysis on the necessity of random 4-quadrant cervical biopsies and endocervical curettage in women with positive screening but negative colposcopy. Medicine (Baltimore) 2017; 96.
  22. close Massad LS, Perkins RB, Naresh A, et al. Colposcopy standards: Guidelines for endocervical curettage at colposcopy. J Low Genit Tract Dis 2023; 27:97–101.
  23. close Shepherd JP, Guido R, Lowder JL, et al. Should endocervical curettage routinely be performed at the time of colposcopy? A cost-effectiveness analysis. J Low Genit Tract Dis 2014; 18:101–8.
  24. close World Health Organization. Global strategy to accelerate the elimination of cervical cancer as a public health problem. Geneva, WHO 2020;
    Available: here
  25. close Health New Zealand. NCSP policies and standards. section 6: Providinga colposcopy service.
    Available: here [Accessed 10 Dec 2024]
  26. close National Health Service Cervical Screening Programme in England. Cervical screening: Programme and colposcopy management. NHSCSP No20 2021;
    Available: here [Accessed 10 Dec 2024]
  27. close Wu AY, Reemira R, Qiao YL, et al. Advances and challenges in the application of artificial intelligence in the diagnosis and treatment of cervical lesions. CGPJ 2022; 25:2215–22.

Crossmark logoCrossmark logo
  • Received: 7 May 2025
  • Accepted: 22 August 2025
  • First published: 17 September 2025

Altmetric

Altmetric scores reflect online attention articles receive, shown as a central number with coloured threads for each source

Dimensions

Dimensions shows where and when an article has been cited, helping readers understand its academic influence over time