The aim of this paper is to report on how AFAQAP guidelines regarding the technical and diagnostic levels of cervical smears as well as the ANAES guidelines relating to the clinical follow-up of abnormal smears are applied. The material upon which the study is based was collected from a series of cervical smears representing 10% of those paid for by the French Social Security over a one year period in the Bouches du Rhône district. It appears that the identification of the quality of the sampling done by the pathology lab was poor (21.5%). With respect to the clinical follow-up of abnormal smears, the number of patients with whom there was no follow-up was rather high (12%), the treatment methods were heterogeneous and the clinical care for high grade lesions was insufficient in some cases. We have highlighted the need for follow-up within a group of subnormal smears not usually classified as pathological, but whose neglect would lead to a detrimental rate of false negatives for the patients concerned.