Self-collecting a cervico-vaginal specimen for cervical cancer screening: an exploratory study of acceptability among medically underserved women in rural Appalachia

Primary human papillomavirus testing by clinician- versus self-collection: Awareness and acceptance among cervical cancer screening-eligible women

OBJECTIVES

Primary human papillomavirus (HPV) testing by clinician-collection is endorsed by U.S. guideline organizations for cervical cancer screening, but uptake remains low and insights into patients' understanding are limited. This study aims to primarily address patient awareness of primary HPV screening by clinician-collection and acceptance of primary HPV screening by clinician- and self-collection, and secondarily assess factors associated with awareness and acceptance.

SETTING

Primary care practices affiliated with an academic medical center.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey study of screening-eligible women aged 30-65 years was conducted to assess awareness and acceptability of primary HPV screening. We analyzed bivariate associations of respondent characteristics with awareness of primary HPV screening by clinician-collection, willingness to have clinician- or self-collected primary HPV testing, and reasons for self-collection preference.

RESULTS

Respondents (n = 351; response rate = 23.4%) reported cervical cancer screening adherence of 82.8% but awareness of clinician-collected primary HPV as an option was low (18.9%) and only associated with HPV testing with recent screening (p = 0.003). After reviewing a description of primary HPV screening, willingness for clinician-collected (81.8%) or home self-collected (76.1%) HPV testing was high, if recommended by a provider. Acceptability of clinician-collected HPV testing was associated with higher income (p = 0.009) and for self-collection was associated with higher income (p = 0.002) and higher education (p = 0.02). Higher education was associated with reporting self-collection as easier than clinic-collection (p = 0.02). Women expected self-collection to be more convenient (94%), less embarrassing (85%), easier (85%), and less painful (81%) than clinician-collection.

CONCLUSIONS

Educational interventions are needed to address low awareness about the current clinician-collected primary HPV screening option and to prepare for anticipated federal licensure of self-collection kits. Informing women about self-collection allows them to recognize benefits which could address screening barriers.

HPV self-sampling implementation strategies to engage under screened communities in cervical cancer screening: a scoping review to inform screening programs

Introduction

Human papillomavirus (HPV) testing as a method of cervical cancer screening can be performed by healthcare providers or by patients through self-sampling directly in the community, removing several barriers experienced by under screened populations. The objective of this scoping review was to determine which HPV self-sampling implementation and engagement strategies have been used to engage under screened populations (i.e., Indigenous, newcomer, and rural and remote communities) in cervical cancer screening.

Methods

A scoping review was conducted searching MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and SocINDEX from inception to August 2023. The inclusion criteria were: (1) Indigenous, newcomer, and rural and remote communities; (2) countries identified as members of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development; and (3) intervention included HPV self-sampling. The review was registered prior to conducting the search (https://osf.io/zfvp9).

Results

A total of 26 studies out of 2,741 studies met the inclusion criteria. In-person engagement with trusted community leaders was the most widely used and accepted recruitment and engagement strategy across all three populations. Six out of seven studies with Indigenous communities distributed HPV self-sampling kits to eligible participants in person in a clinical setting for collection on site or at home. Similarly, nine of the identified studies that engaged newcomers recruited participants in person through the community, where eligible participants were either given a kit (n = 7) or received one in the mail (n = 2). Lastly, of the 10 identified studies engaging rural and remote participants in HPV self-sampling, six recruited eligible participants in person at various community locations and four used electronic medical records or registries to identify and mail kits to participants.

Discussion

HPV self-sampling through in person kit distribution and mail out of HPV self-sampling kits is an effective way to increase participation rates amongst under screened populations.

Acceptability of HPV self-collection: A qualitative study of Black women living with type II diabetes and social vulnerability

Introduction

Human papillomavirus (HPV) causes 99.7% of cervical cancer cases. Cervical cancer is preventable through early detection via HPV testing. However, the number of women screened for cervical cancer has not increased in the last several years. Lower screening rates among women living in high poverty and social vulnerability areas, Black women, and women with chronic co-morbidities (e.g., type 2 diabetes (T2D)) are associated with their higher cervical cancer mortality rates. When screened, Black women are more likely to be diagnosed at later stages and die from cervical cancer. HPV self-collection decreases barriers to cervical cancer screening and can help lessen disparities among underserved women. This study aimed to examine the acceptability of HPV self-collection among Black women with T2D living in socially vulnerable communities.

Methods

Qualitative semi-structured interviews were conducted with 29 Black women with T2D living in communities with high social vulnerability. The Health Belief Model informed the development of the interview guide to gather data on the acceptability of HPV self-collection.

Results

Three main themes aligned with the Health Belief Model were identified: (1) HPV self-collection provides a comfortable alternative to in-clinic HPV testing (perceived benefits); (2) HPV self-collection would result in awareness of current HPV status (health motivation); and (3) Women were concerned about collecting their sample accurately (perceived barriers).

Discussion/Conclusion

Black women with T2D living in communities with high social vulnerability identified multiple benefits of cervical cancer screening through HPV self-collection. Women are concerned about their ability to collect these samples correctly. Our findings call for future studies focusing on increasing self-efficacy and skills to collect HPV samples among Black women with chronic conditions like T2D who reside in underserved communities with high social vulnerability.

Acceptability of human papillomavirus self-collection and the role of telehealth: a prospective, randomized study stratified by menopausal status

OBJECTIVE

We investigated the utility of telehealth instruction versus mail-based written instruction in facilitating high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) self-collection among post-menopausal patients compared with pre-menopausal patients, as well as the impact on acceptability and feasibility.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective, randomized study of people eligible for cervical cancer screening, stratified by menopausal status, to undergo standard written or telehealth-based instructions for hrHPV self-collection. English speaking individuals residing in Oregon, with a cervix, eligible for primary hrHPV testing, and with access to a video-capable device were included. Patients with prior hysterectomy, trachelectomy, diagnosis of cervical cancer, or pelvic radiation for gynecologic cancer were excluded. We compared preference for and opinions about self-collection and hrHPV test results, by randomization group and stratified by menopausal status using descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

Among 123 patients enrolled, 61 identified as post-menopausal with a median age of 57 years. While the majority of post-menopausal participants who received telehealth instructions found it helpful, only 6.1% considered telehealth instructions necessary to complete self-testing. There was no difference in opinion of telehealth by menopausal status. Overall, 88.5% of post-menopausal participants preferred self-collection to provider-collection. There were no significant differences between pre- and post-menopausal participants in terms of test preference, discomfort, ease of use, or perceptions of self-collection.

CONCLUSION

Telehealth instruction did not add significant value to patients participating in hrHPV self-collection, nor did it alter the acceptability of hrHPV-self collection among an English-speaking cohort. Compared with prior experiences with provider-collected screening, hrHPV self-collection was preferred by both pre- and post-menopausal participants. There were no significant differences in preference for provider- versus self-collection when stratified by menopausal status.

Self-sampling tools to increase cancer screening among underserved patients: a pilot randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Screening can reduce cancer mortality, but uptake is suboptimal and characterized by disparities. Home-based self-sampling can facilitate screening for colorectal cancer (with stool tests, eg, fecal immunochemical tests) and for cervical cancer (with self-collected human papillomavirus tests), especially among patients who face barriers to accessing health care. Additional data are needed on feasibility and potential effects of self-sampling tools for cancer screening among underserved patients.

METHODS

We conducted a pilot randomized controlled trial with patients (female, ages 50-65 years, out of date with colorectal and cervical cancer screening) recruited from federally qualified health centers in rural and racially segregated counties in Pennsylvania. Participants in the standard-of-care arm (n = 24) received screening reminder letters. Participants in the self-sampling arm (n = 24) received self-sampling tools for fecal immunochemical tests and human papillomavirus testing. We assessed uptake of screening (10-week follow-up), self-sampling screening outcomes, and psychosocial variables. Analyses used Fisher exact tests to assess the effect of study arm on outcomes.

RESULTS

Cancer screening was higher in the self-sampling arm than the standard-of-care arm (colorectal: 75% vs 13%, respectively, odds ratio = 31.32, 95% confidence interval = 5.20 to 289.33; cervical: 79% vs 8%, odds ratio = 72.03, 95% confidence interval = 9.15 to 1141.41). Among participants who returned the self-sampling tools, the prevalence of abnormal findings was 24% for colorectal and 18% for cervical cancer screening. Cancer screening knowledge was positively associated with uptake (P < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Self-sampling tools can increase colorectal and cervical cancer screening among unscreened, underserved patients. Increasing the use of self-sampling tools can improve primary care and cancer detection among underserved patients.

CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION NUMBER

STUDY00015480.

Multilevel Associations with Cancer Screening Among Women in Rural, Segregated Communities Within the Northeastern USA: a Mixed-Methods Study

We recruited women (primarily non-Hispanic White) from 14 rural, segregated counties in a Northeastern US state for an explanatory sequential study: 100 women (ages 50-65 years) completed a survey, and 16 women participated in focus groups. We sought to identify personal (e.g., healthcare mistrust) and environmental (e.g., travel time to healthcare providers) factors related to colorectal and cervical cancer screening. Quantitatively, 89% of participants were up-to-date for cervical screening, and 65% for colorectal screening. Factors interacted such that compounding barriers were associated with lower odds of screening (e.g., insurance status and healthcare mistrust: interaction p = .02 for cervical; interaction p = .05 for colorectal). Qualitatively, three themes emerged regarding barriers to screening: privacy concerns, logistical barriers, and lack of trust in adequacy of healthcare services. While cancer screening was common in rural, segregated counties, women who reported both environmental and personal barriers to screening had lower uptake. Future interventions to promote screening can target these barriers.

HPV Testing Behaviors and Willingness to Use HPV Self-sampling at Home Among African American (AA) and Sub-Saharan African Immigrant (SAI) Women

BACKGROUND

HPV self-sampling is an emerging HPV testing method that offers reliable identification of cervical precancer and cancer. To determine the feasibility of HPV self-sampling in the USA, information is needed regarding women's use of HPV test and willingness to use self-sampling, especially among disparate groups such as African American (AA) and sub-Saharan African immigrant (SAI) women. The purpose of this study was to examine factors associated with having had at least one HPV test and willingness to use HPV self-sampling among AA and SAI women.

METHODS

AA and SAI women (n = 91) recruited from community settings completed a survey in a cross-sectional study. Data included sociodemographics, HPV and HPV testing knowledge, and willingness to use a HPV self-sampling test at home. Logistic regressions were performed to evaluate associations with having had a HPV test and willingness to use self-sampling.

RESULTS

Respondents mean age was 38.2 years (SD = 12.6) and 65% were SAIs. The majority (84%) reported having had at least one Pap test and (36%) had at least one HPV test. Sixty-seven percent were willing to self-sample at home. Age, education, and HPV testing knowledge were associated with having had a HPV test. Being uninsured and likelihood to accept a Pap test if recommended were associated with willingness to use self-sampling at home for an HPV test.

CONCLUSIONS

Health care providers have an important role in recommending cervical cancer screening according to current guidelines. HPV self-sampling may be a promising strategy to reach older, less educated, uninsured, and underinsured Black women.

Prevalence of High-Risk Human Papillomavirus by RNA Assay in Home Self-Collected Samples Among Underscreened People in North Carolina

BACKGROUND

Low-income and uninsured people with a cervix (PWC) are at the highest risk of being underscreened for cervical cancer. We evaluated the prevalence of high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) on home self-collected samples, as well as rates of in-clinic follow-up and risk factors associated with hrHPV positivity in this at-risk population.

METHODS

My Body My Test 3 was conducted between 2016 and 2019 in North Carolina among individuals aged 25 to 64 years, overdue for cervical cancer screening, and with incomes of <250% of the US Federal Poverty Level. Our analytic sample included participants randomized to the self-collection arm who returned self-collected cervicovaginal brush samples for HPV testing (n = 329). Samples were tested for 14 hrHPV types by an HPV RNA assay and further genotyped for HPV-16 and HPV-18/45. We examined behavioral risk factors for hrHPV positivity using logistic regression and between-subject t tests.

RESULTS

High-risk HPV RNA prevalence was 16% (n = 52/329) in self-collected samples. Of the hrHPV-positive participants, 24 (46%) presented for in-clinic cervical cancer screening, compared with 56 (20%) of hrHPV-negative participants. Those with ≥2 sexual partners in the past year were twice as likely to be hrHPV positive in adjusted analyses (adjusted odds ratio, 2.00 [95% confidence interval, 1.03-3.88]). High-risk HPV-positive and HPV-negative participants had similar attitudes toward screening, with the exception of hrHPV-positive participants who reported a lower perceived risk of cervical cancer than those who were hrHPV negative (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The hrHPV RNA prevalence was similar to findings in other underscreened PWC in the United States. Efforts to reach underscreened PWC are critical for cervical cancer prevention. Future studies aimed at home self-collection should address methods of increasing clinic attendance and completion of treatment among those with HPV-positive results.

Cervical Cancer Screening Postpandemic: Self-Sampling Opportunities to Accelerate the Elimination of Cervical Cancer

The persisting burden of cervical cancer in underserved populations and low-resource regions worldwide, worsened by the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, requires proactive strategies and expanded screening options to maintain and improve screening coverage and its effects on incidence and mortality from cervical cancer. Self-sampling as a screening strategy has unique advantages from both a public health and individual patient perspective. Some of the barriers to screening can be mitigated by self-sampling, and resources can be better allocated to patients at the highest risk of developing cervical cancer. This review summarizes the implementation options for self-sampling and associated challenges, evidence in support of self-sampling, the available devices, and opportunities for expansion beyond human papillomavirus testing.

Assessing the Effectiveness of Cancer Screening Interventions Targeting Appalachian Populations: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

Appalachian residents have higher cancer prevalence and invasive cancer incidence in almost all cancer types relative to non-Appalachian residents. Public health interventions have been carried out to increase preventive cancer screening participation. However, no studies have evaluated the effectiveness of existing interventions targeting cancer screening uptake in this high-risk population. The main objective of this study is to assess the effectiveness of interventions aimed at increasing uptake and/or continuing participation in screened cancers (breast, cervical, colorectal, lung, and prostate) in Appalachia.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of electronic databases and gray literature using a combination of MeSH and free-text search terms related to breast, cervical, colorectal, lung, and prostate cancer; mass screening; health promotion; and Appalachia. We identified 3,014 articles of which 15 articles were included. We assessed methodological quality using validated tools and analyzed findings using narrative synthesis.

FINDINGS

Fifteen studies reported uptake and/or continued participation in screening interventions; these focused on cervical (n = 7), colorectal (n = 5), breast (n = 2), and lung (n = 1) cancers in Appalachia. Interventions included diverse components: mass media campaigns, community outreach events, community health workers, interpersonal counseling, and educational materials. We found that multi-strategy interventions had higher screening uptake relative to interventions employing 1 intervention strategy. Studies that targeted noncompliant populations and leveraged existing community-based organization partnerships had a substantial increase in screening participation versus others.

CONCLUSIONS

There is an urgent need for further research and implementation of effective cancer prevention and screening interventions to reduce disparities in cancer morbidity and mortality in Appalachian populations.

HPV self-sampling for cervical cancer screening: a systematic review of values and preferences

INTRODUCTION

The WHO recommends human papillomavirus (HPV) cervical self-sampling as an additional screening method and HPV DNA testing as an effective approach for the early detection of cervical cancer for women aged ≥30 years. This systematic review assesses end user's values and preferences related to HPV self-sampling.

METHODS

We searched four electronic databases (PubMed, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature and Embase) using search terms for HPV and self-sampling to identify articles meeting inclusion criteria. A standardised data extraction form was used to capture study setting, population, sample size and results related to values and preferences.

RESULTS

Of 1858 records retrieved, 72 studies among 52 114 participants published between 2002 and 2018 were included in this review. Almost all studies were cross-sectional surveys. Study populations included end users who were mainly adolescent girls and adult women. Ages ranged from 14 to 80 years. Most studies (57%) were conducted in high-income countries. Women generally found HPV self-sampling highly acceptable regardless of age, income or country of residence. Lack of self-confidence with collecting a reliable sample was the most commonly cited reason for preferring clinician-collected samples. Most women preferred home-based self-sampling to self-sampling at a clinic. The cervical swab was the most common and most accepted HPV DNA sampling device.

CONCLUSIONS

HPV self-sampling is generally a highly accepted method of cervical cancer screening for end users globally. End user preferences for self-sampling device, method and setting can inform the development of new and expanded interventions to increase HPV screening.

A conjoint analysis study on self-sampling for human papillomavirus (HPV) testing characteristics among black women in Indiana

Background

Self-sampling for HPV testing may be a method to increase overall cervical cancer screening rates among Black women, who are underscreened for cervical cancer in parts of the US. The purpose of this study was to assess preferred characteristics for delivery of HPV self-sampling kits, return of HPV self-sampling kits, and communication of HPV test results and explore sociodemographic factors (income, education, and marital status) associated with acceptability of self-sampling for HPV testing.

Methods

Survey data were gathered at an Indiana minority health fair. Participants evaluated 9 scenarios that varied along 3 dimensions: HPV self-sampling kit delivery (mail, pharmacy pick-up, or clinic pick-up), HPV self-sampling kit return (mail, pharmacy drop-off, or clinic drop-off), and HPV test results (mail, phone call, or text message). The 9 scenarios were produced from a fractional factorial design and rated on a 0 to 100 scale. Ratings-based conjoint analysis (RBCA) determined how each dimension influenced ratings. A measure for acceptability of self-sampling was obtained from the ratings of all 9 scenarios. The acceptability measure was regressed on sociodemographics.

Results

The 98 participants ranged in age from 21 to 65 (M = 45). Across the 9 scenarios, overall acceptability to self-sample had a mean of 60.9 (SD = 31.3). RBCA indicated that HPV self-sampling kit return had the most influence on ratings, followed by HPV self-sampling kit delivery, and finally, HPV test result communication. Thirty-six percent of participants rated all self-sampling scenarios the same. Sociodemographic characteristics were not associated with acceptability of self-sampling.

Conclusions

Self-sampling for HPV testing was found to be generally acceptable to Black women in this pilot survey study. This information could be used by researchers developing self-sampling interventions and the implementation of self-sampling among providers.

Results of a Pilot Study of a Mail-Based Human Papillomavirus Self-Testing Program for Underscreened Women From Appalachian Ohio

BACKGROUND

Human papillomavirus (HPV) self-testing is an emerging cervical cancer screening strategy, yet few mail-based HPV self-testing programs have been implemented in the United States. We report the results of a pilot study of a mail-based program, the Health Outcomes through Motivation and Education Project.

METHODS

In 2015 to 2016, we recruited 103 women from Appalachian Ohio who were aged 30 to 65 years and had not received a Papanicolaou (Pap) test in at least 3 years. Women were mailed an HPV self-test and randomized to receive either (a) self-test instructions developed by the device manufacturer and a standard information brochure about cervical cancer (control group) or (b) self-test instructions developed by the Health Outcomes through Motivation and Education Project and a photo story information brochure about cervical cancer (intervention group). Logistic regression compared study arms on HPV self-test return and receipt of a Pap test.

RESULTS

Overall, 80 (78%) women returned their HPV self-test. Return was similar among the intervention and control groups (78% vs. 77%; odds ratio, 1.09; 95% confidence interval, 0.43-2.76). Among returners, 26% had an oncogenic HPV type detected in their sample. Women who returned their self-test reported high levels of satisfaction and positive experiences with the self-testing process. Few women overall received a Pap test (11%), and Pap testing was similar among the intervention and control groups (14% vs. 8%; odds ratio, 1.91; 95% confidence interval, 0.52-6.97).

CONCLUSIONS

Mail-based HPV self-testing programs are a potentially promising strategy for reaching underscreened women in Appalachia. Efforts are needed to better understand how to optimize the success of such programs.

Acceptability and Feasibility of Community-Based, Lay Navigator-Facilitated At-Home Self-Collection for Human Papillomavirus Testing in Underscreened Women

Objective: Women without regular health care providers or a medical home routinely fail to complete recommended cervical cancer screening. At-home self-collection of samples to test for high-risk strains of human papillomavirus (hrHPV) can improve screening rates. This study documents acceptability and feasibility of community lay navigator (LN)-facilitated at-home self-collection for underscreened women in Appalachian Virginia. Materials and Methods: This study used mixed methods in three phases. Phase I involved focus groups of LNs to ensure cultural acceptability of self-collection, and to enhance recruitment of medically underserved women. An environmental scan of community resources and climate was created in Phase II. During Phase III, underscreened women in Appalachian Virginia (the far southwest corner of Virginia) were recruited to complete hrHPV testing using LN-provided self-collection kits. Results: LN-facilitated at-home self-collection for HPV testing was deemed culturally acceptable and feasible to participants in this community-based pilot study. Self-kit training included 64 LNs, of which 35 engaged in the study and were provided 77 kits and instructions. A total of 59 self-kits were returned, of which 42 were correctly completed with valid HPV results, yielding a 16.6% hrHPV rate. Conclusions: Over a quarter of the women LNs recruited had no medical home, indicating this delivery model may have potential to reach women at increased risk of being underscreened for cervical cancer. Research is needed to identify optimal approaches to increase LN participation in outreach self-collection interventions.

Predictors of Cervical Cancer Screening Among Infrequently Screened Women Completing Human Papillomavirus Self-Collection: My Body My Test-1

Background: Approximately one-half of cervical cancer cases in the United States occur in underscreened or never-screened women. We examined predictors to completing Papanicolaou (Pap) testing and whether a positive human papillomavirus (HPV) self-collection result affects Pap testing adherence among underscreened women. Materials and Methods: Low-income women aged 30-65 years who reported no Pap testing in ≥4 years were recruited in North Carolina. Knowledge, attitudes, and barriers regarding cervical cancer and Pap testing were assessed by telephone questionnaires. We mailed self-collection kits for HPV testing and provided information regarding where to obtain affordable Pap testing. Participants received $45 for completing all activities. We used multivariable logistic regression to assess the predictors of longer reported time since last Pap (≥10 vs. 4-9 years) and of completion of Pap testing following study enrollment (follow-up Pap). Results: Participants (n = 230) were primarily black (55%), uninsured (64%), and with ≤high school education (59%). Cost and finding an affordable clinic were the most commonly reported barriers to screening. White women and those with ≤high school education reported longer intervals since last Pap test. Half of the participants reported completing a follow-up Pap test (55%). Women with a positive HPV self-collection were five times more likely to report completing a follow-up Pap test than those with negative self-collection (odds ratio = 5.1, 95% confidence interval 1.4-25.7). Conclusions: Improving awareness of resources for affordable screening could increase cervical cancer screening in underserved women. Home-based HPV self-collection represents an opportunity to re-engage infrequently screened women into preventive screening services.

Genital self-sampling for HPV-based cervical cancer screening: a qualitative study of preferences and barriers in rural Ethiopia

Background

In the context of WHO’s “task shifting” project and growing global consensus on primary HPV-based cervical cancer screening, self-sampling is a promising new tool to expand screening access, uptake and coverage for women worldwide. We aimed to explore perceptions and acceptability of HPV self-sampling-based cervical cancer screening among community members and health professionals in rural northwest Ethiopia and to identify preferences and socio-cultural barriers regarding self-sampling in order to design a suitable high-coverage screening intervention for a rural African setting.

Methods

Four community-based focus group discussions (FGD) were conducted in the rural district of Dabat, Northwest Ethiopia, each comprising 8 to 14 female participants, counting a total of 41 participants. The groups were homogenously composed in terms of their socio-economic status in the community. They included health centre attendees, community members, nurses and health development army leaders (HDAL). Two qualitative data collection experts conducted the interviews in the local language, using a FGD guide with several thematic areas. All participants granted written informed consent prior to the conduct of the interviews. As a concrete example of an existing self-sampling approach for cervical cancer screening we used the Evalyn® Brush.

Results

Emerging themes included (i) misconceptions and low awareness about cervical cancer among community residents and primary health care providers in rural northwest Ethiopia, (ii) stigmatization and social exclusion of affected women, (iii) delay in seeking of health care due to poor access and availability of services, and lacking of a concept of early cancer prevention, (iv) need of spousal permission, (v) fear of financial burden and (vi) fear of social marginalization. The self-sampling device was regarded to be acceptable and was judged to be easy to use for most women. The existing Ethiopian health care structure could facilitate a community approach.

Conclusion

Home-based self-sampling for cervical cancer screening is a socially acceptable and feasible “task shifting” method that will increase cervical cancer screening access and coverage in the Ethiopian study community. Education, awareness creation, community mobilization and family inclusion are identified as key activities to promote, implement and facilitate “task shifting” approaches like self-sampling.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12889-019-7354-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Acceptability of Human Papillomavirus Self-Sampling Among a National Sample of Women in the United States

As human papillomavirus (HPV) self-sampling continues to emerge as a potential cervical cancer screening strategy in the United States, it is necessary to examine women's acceptability of this screening approach. Furthermore, since several HPV self-sampling devices exist, it is important to determine if women's preferences differ by device type. We conducted an online survey in Fall 2017 with a national sample of women (n = 605) ages 21–65 years (the recommended age range for cervical cancer screening). Multivariable linear regression identified correlates of women's willingness to use an HPV self-sample at home. We used repeated measures analysis of variance to determine if preferences differed across four self-sampling devices: Evalyn^® Brush (Device A), HerSwab^® (Device B), Catch-All^® Swab (Device C), and Qvintip^® (Device D). Most women were willing to use an HPV self-sample at home (mean = 4.03 [possible range: 1–5], standard deviation = 1.09, 72.7% indicated “probably willing” or “definitely willing”). The most common concerns about self-sampling were related to test accuracy (53.1%) and obtaining the sample incorrectly (51.1%). Women were more willing to use an HPV self-sample at home if they reported greater perceived severity of cervical cancer (β = 0.16), reported an annual income less than $50,000 (β = 0.13), or were a former smoker (β = 0.11). Women were more willing to use Device A (mean = 3.72, 67.6% indicated “agree” or “strongly agree”), Device C (mean = 3.86, 73.9% indicated “agree” or “strongly agree”), and Device D (mean = 3.81, 72.1% indicated “agree” or “strongly agree”) than Device B (mean = 3.36, 49.4% indicated “agree” or “strongly agree”; all p < 0.05). Acceptability of HPV self-sampling as a cervical cancer screening strategy is generally high among women. Future efforts should consider the potential impact that device type may have on women's use of an HPV self-sample at home.

Barriers to the non-acceptance of cervical cancer screenings (pap smear test) in women of childbearing age in a rural area of Peru

Introduction

According to recent statistics, there is a high percentage of refusal of cervical cancer screening using the Pap smear test by women in rural communities in developing countries such as Peru. There are few studies on the reasons to explain said refusal in this country. The objective of this study was to determine the barriers related to the non-acceptance of cervical cancer screening using the Pap smear test in women of childbearing age from a rural Peruvian community.

Methods

Cross-sectional study, with a total of 892 women of childbearing age from the rural Peruvian community of Marián, Huaraz province, Ancash region, who did not accept screening for cervical cancer using the Pap smear test during their care at the Marián Health Centre. A questionnaire given from September 2017 to April 2018 was used. The information was processed with the statistics programme for social science 22.0 programme, using the Chi-square statistical test.

Results

For 4–6 years, 52.5% of women refused cervical cancer screening using the Pap smear test. The barriers that showed a statistically significant relationship to the non-acceptance of cervical cancer screening using the Pap test were socio-demographic (age, marital status, education level, occupation and home income) and institutional barriers (counselling for cervical cancer screening, importance of the gender of health personnel administering the screening, history of mistreatment by health personnel, fear or embarrassment of the screening procedure and a delay in sending the results) (p < 0.05); while a history of sexually transmitted infections and a feeling of physical well-being in sexual and reproductive health were the only related reproductive barriers (p <0.05), this was not demonstrated with the age of first sexual activity, number of sexual partners, age of first pregnancy and total number of pregnancies (p > 0.05).

Conclusions

Socio-demographic and institutional barriers are related to the non-acceptance of cervical cancer screening using the Pap test in women of childbearing age in the rural Peruvian community of Marián, with a lesser emphasis on reproductive barriers. With this in mind, we recommend undertaking broader studies in populations of different age groups, which should be oriented towards the design and application of preventive/promotional programmes by health institutions to promote the participation of community workers with the goal of aiding the identification and control of said barriers, reducing the refusal of cervical cancer screenings by women from rural areas.

Effects of an Education Intervention about HPV Self-Testing for Healthcare Providers and Staff

Human papillomavirus (HPV) self-testing is an emerging cervical cancer screening strategy, yet efforts to educate healthcare providers and staff about HPV self-testing are lacking. We report the findings of a brief education intervention about HPV self-testing for healthcare providers and staff. We conducted education sessions during 2015 with healthcare providers and staff (n = 33) from five federally qualified health centers located in Appalachian Ohio. Participants attended a one-time session and completed pre- and post-intervention surveys. Analyses for paired data assessed changes in knowledge and beliefs about HPV, HPV-related disease, and HPV self-testing. The intervention increased participants' knowledge and affected many of the beliefs examined. Participants answered an average of 4.67 of six knowledge items correctly on pre-intervention surveys and 5.82 items correctly on post-intervention surveys (p < 0.001). The proportion of participants who answered all six knowledge items correctly increased substantially (pre-intervention =9% vs. post-intervention =82%, p < 0.001). Compared to pre-intervention surveys, participants more strongly believed on post-intervention surveys that it is important to examine HPV self-testing as a potential cervical cancer screening strategy, that their female patients would be willing to use an HPV self-test at home by themselves, and that they have the knowledge to talk with their patients about HPV self-testing (all p < 0.05). A brief education intervention can be a viable approach for increasing knowledge and affecting beliefs about HPV self-testing among healthcare providers and staff. Findings will be valuable for planning and developing future HPV self-test interventions that include an education component for healthcare providers and staff.

Preference for Human Papillomavirus Self-Collection and Papanicolaou: Survey of Underscreened Women in North Carolina

OBJECTIVES

Self-collection of samples for human papillomavirus (HPV) testing (self-collection) has the potential to increase cervical cancer screening among underscreened women. We assessed attitudes toward at-home HPV self-collection compared with clinic-based Pap testing in this higher-risk population.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Participants were low-income women in North Carolina overdue for cervical cancer screening. Women self-collected samples at home, returned samples by mail for HPV testing, and completed phone questionnaires about at-home HPV self-collection. Participants were referred to clinic-based Pap testing and invited to complete a second questionnaire about Pap testing. A cross-sectional questionnaire compared attitudes, experiences, and preferences for self-collection versus Pap testing and assessed predictors of preference for HPV self-collection.

RESULTS

Half (51%) of 221 women reported a preference for HPV self-collection, 19% preferred Pap testing, and 27% reported no preference. More women reported difficulty finding time to do the Pap test (31%) than the self-test (13%, p = .003) and being afraid of the self-test results (50%) than the Pap test results (36%, p = .02). There were relatively fewer reports of physical discomfort and pain from self-collection than Pap testing (discomfort: 18% self; 48% Pap; pain: 8% self; 30% Pap, p = .001). No differences were found in positive versus negative thoughts about the tests, trust in the tests' safety and accuracy, or willingness to do tests again.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall positive attitudes toward HPV self-collection compared with Pap testing among underscreened women suggest that self-collection is a promising option to increase cervical cancer screening in this high-risk population.

A Social-Ecological Review of Cancer Disparities in Kentucky

Cancer continuously ranks among the top 10 leading causes of death in the United States. The burden of cancer is particularly elevated in the Commonwealth of Kentucky and its 54-county Appalachian region, where cancer is the leading cause of death. Kentucky's high rates of cancer have been attributed to a wide range of socioeconomic, behavioral, environmental, and policy influences, resulting in numerous disparities. The present review specifically evaluates the burden of lung, colorectal, cervical, and head and neck cancers in Kentucky, along with resultant cancer control research and community outreach efforts conducted by the state's only National Cancer Institute-designated cancer center using an adapted version of McLeroy's Social-Ecological Model. Here, we categorize disparities and identify relevant intervention approaches based on their level of influence (ie, individual, community, and policy).

Feasibility, validity and acceptability of self-collected samples for human papillomavirus (HPV) testing in rural Malawi

Aim

The World Health Organization (WHO) recently endorsed human papillomavirus (HPV) testing as a cervical cancer screening method in countries without established programs. Self-collection for HPV testing may be an effective way to expand screening. Our objective was to assess the feasibility, validity, and acceptability of self-collection for HPV testing in a population of care-seeking, unscreened women in rural Malawi.

Methods

We enrolled women reporting to a rural Malawian clinic from January to August 2015. Participants were offered the option to self-collect a vaginal sample and the study clinician collected a cervical sample for HPV testing. Using the clinician-collected sample as the reference standard, we calculated a kappa statistic, sensitivity, and specificity by hr-HPV type. Participants also received a brief survey assessing acceptability of the procedure.

Results

Among the 199 enrolled women, 22% had any high risk-HPV. Comparing self- and clinician-collected samples for HPV testing, we found generally high agreement (ϰ = 0.66-0.90) and high specificity (98%-100%), but varied sensitivity (50%-91%) for different types of hr-HPV. We also found that self-collection was acceptable, with 98% of women reporting it was easy to do and 99% reporting willingness to do so again.

Conclusions

WHO guidelines recommend that treatment is available immediately after a positive screening test for clinic-based cervical cancer screening programs. Our findings demonstrate that self-collection of samples for HPV testing is a feasible and acceptable method of cervical cancer screening in this rural Malawian population. High agreement between the self- and clinician-collected samples and high levels of acceptability among women in the study suggest that self-collection of vaginal samples for HPV testing may be effectively incorporated into screening programs among rural, largely unscreened populations.

Self-collected vaginal sampling for the detection of genital human papillomavirus (HPV) using careHPV among Ghanaian women

Background

Detection of genital HPV DNA is recommended as an important strategy for modern cervical cancer screening. Challenges include access to services, the reliance on cervical samples taken by clinicians, and patient’s preference regarding provider gender. The objective of this research was to determine the acceptability, feasibility and performance of alternative self-collected vaginal samples for HPV detection among Ghanaian women.

Methods

A comparative frequency-matched study was conducted in a systematic (1:5) sample of women attending HIV and outpatient clinics in the Cape Coast Teaching Hospital, Ghana. Participants were instructed on self-collection (SC) of vaginal samples using the careHPV brush and a clinician-collected (CC) cervical sample was obtained using a similar brush. Paired specimens were tested for HPV DNA (14 high-risk types) by careHPV assay (Qiagen) and by HPV genotyping (Anyplex II, Seegene).

Results

Overall, 194 women of mean age 44.1 years (SD ± 11.3) were enrolled and 191 paired SC and CC results were analysed. The overall HPV detection concordance was 94.2% (95%CI: 89.9–97.1), Kappa value of 0.88 (p < 0.0001), showing excellent agreement. This agreement was similar between HIV positive (93.8%) and negative (94.7%) women. Sensitivity and specificity of SC compared to CC were 92.6% (95%CI: 85.3–97.0) and 95.9% (95%CI: 89.8–98.8) respectively. The highest sensitivity was among HIV positive women (95.7%, 95%CI: 88.0–99.1) and highest specificity among HIV negative women (98.6%, 95%CI: 92.4–100). Overall, 76.3% women found SC very easy/easy to obtain, 57.7% preferred SC to CC and 61.9% felt SC would increase their likelihood to access cervical cancer screening.

Conclusions

The feasibility, acceptability and performance of SC using careHPV support the use of this alternative form of HPV screening among Ghanaian women. This could be a potential new affordable strategy to improve uptake of the national cervical cancer screening program.

Psychosocial Correlates of Ever Having a Pap Test and Abnormal Pap Results in a Sample of Rural Appalachian Women

BACKGROUND

Despite known prevention and screening efforts, there are higher invasive cervical cancer rates in Appalachia than in other areas of the United States and higher mortality rates in the Appalachian region of Kentucky compared to Appalachian regions of other states.

PURPOSE

The primary purpose of this study was to investigate the association of psychosocial factors relevant to cervical cancer and the outcome of ever having a Pap test in a rural sample of women. The secondary purpose was to determine whether any of the same psychosocial factors were also associated with ever having an abnormal Pap test result among women with a self-reported history of having one or more Pap tests in their lifetime.

METHODS

Data were collected in fall of 2013 from 393 women in 8 economically distressed counties of rural Appalachian Kentucky. Women completed an interviewer-administered survey assessing sociodemographic and health information as well as beliefs about cervical cancer.

FINDINGS

Multivariate logistic regression results indicated that low income and greater perceived local fatalism were significant predictors of never having a Pap test. Lack of personal control over prevention, and peer and family influences were significant predictors of ever having an abnormal Pap test result.

CONCLUSIONS

Educational efforts targeted in rural Appalachia would be supported by encouraging the benefits of early and consistent screening, altering the established norms of community fatalism and lack of personal control over prevention, and creating targeted messages through public campaigns that convince rural Appalachian women that cervical cancer is highly preventable and screenable.

Self-administered versus provider-directed sampling in the Anishinaabek Cervical Cancer Screening Study (ACCSS): a qualitative investigation with Canadian First Nations women

BACKGROUND

While (Pap)anicolaou screening has helped to decrease cervical cancer incidence in Canada, First Nations women continue to have a higher burden and mortality relative to mainstream populations. Many First Nations women may feel uncomfortable with the invasiveness of this test, contributing to this statistic. Implemented from 2009 to 2015 in 10 Northwest Ontario First Nations communities, the Anishinaabek Cervical Cancer Screening Study (ACCSS) uniquely addressed this Indigenous health inequity through a mixed methods approach.

OBJECTIVE

Our goal was to offer an alternative test which the women could do themselves: human papillomavirus (HPV) testing based on self-sampling. We investigated whether First Nations women preferred HPV self-sampling over healthcare provider (HCP)-administered Pap screening.

METHODS

Participatory action researchinformed by the ethical space concept has guided all stages of the ACCSS. We conducted qualitative interviews with 16 HCPs and 8 focus group discussions with 69 female community members followed by a cluster-randomised controlled trial (RCT). Here, we draw on the qualitative field data and an end-of-study community update gathering to disseminate and contextualise research findings. Informant data were evaluated using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

We discuss factors influencing participants' strong preference for HPV self-sampling over physician-conducted Pap screening. Key arguments included enhanced accessibility and more personal control, less physical and emotional discomfort and fewer concerns regarding privacy of test results. For future implementation of HPV self-sampling, study participants emphasised the need for more culturally sensitive education addressed to community members of all genders, starting at school, clarifying that HPV causes cervical cancer. Further, HPV infection should be de-stigmatised by accentuating that it affects men and women alike.

CONCLUSION

Here we show that self-sampling in conjunction with community engagement and culturally sensitive education and could be a viable option for underscreened Canadian First Nations women. These informant data echo our previous RCT results.

Emerging role of HPV self-sampling in cervical cancer screening for hard-to-reach women: Focused literature review

OBJECTIVE

To provide a focused critical review of the literature on the acceptability, feasibility, and uptake of human papillomavirus (HPV) self-sampling among hard-to-reach women.

QUALITY OF EVIDENCE

A focused search to obtain relevant literature published in English between 1997 and 2015 was done using PubMed and EMBASE using search terms including HPV self-test or HPV self-sample or HPV kit in combination with acceptability or feasibility. Only studies that focused on never-screened or underscreened populations were included in this review.

MAIN MESSAGE

Human papillomavirus self-sampling was found to be highly acceptable and feasible among these hard-to-reach women across most studies. Mailing of self-sampling kits has been shown to increase participation among hard-to reach women. Some concerns remain regarding adherence to further follow-up among high-risk women with positive test results for HPV after screening.

CONCLUSION

There is a strong body of evidence to support the usefulness of HPV self-sampling in increasing participation of hard-to-reach women in screening programs (level I evidence). Convenience, privacy, ease of use, and, likely, cost-effectiveness of HPV self-sampling are driving forces in its emerging role in cervical cancer screening among hard-to-reach women. Key barriers to participation could be addressed by overcoming disparities in HPV-related knowledge and perceptions about cervical cancer screening.

Clinician and Patient Acceptability of Self-Collected Human Papillomavirus Testing for Cervical Cancer Screening

BACKGROUND

To evaluate clinician and patient attitudes toward home self-collected human papillomavirus (HPV) testing for cervical cancer screening.

METHODS

Women aged 21-65 years were recruited for a randomized trial comparing home self-collected HPV testing to standard clinician-collected Pap screening. Participants were surveyed about their attitudes toward self-collected HPV testing. Clinicians performing cervical cancer screening in University of Washington medical clinics were also surveyed to determine their acceptability of self-collected HPV testing.

RESULTS

Over half (59.1%) of the 1,769 women surveyed preferred self-collected HPV testing to clinician-collected tests. Reasons most often cited were convenience or time saving (82.7%), and avoiding embarrassment or discomfort associated with pelvic exam (38.1%). Women who did not prefer self-collected HPV testing reported greater faith in clinician-collected samples (56.7%) or a desire for a clinic visit to address other issues (42.4%). One hundred eighteen (49.6%) of 238 physicians and midlevel providers surveyed completed the survey. The majority (78.0%) reported that they would recommend a self-collected HPV test if the test had qualities such as high sensitivity and cost effectiveness. Provider concerns mirrored those of patients, namely ensuring adequate sample collection and the opportunity to address other health concerns.

CONCLUSION

Patients and clinicians are supportive of self-collected HPV testing. However, concerns regarding adequacy of samples that are self collected and the desire to see a provider in a clinic setting for other health needs highlight areas that need to be addressed if self collection proves to be a viable option for cervical cancer screening.

Options in human papillomavirus (HPV) detection for cervical cancer screening: comparison between full genotyping and a rapid qualitative HPV-DNA assay in Ghana

BACKGROUND

Modern cervical cancer screening increasingly relies on the use of molecular techniques detecting high-risk oncogenic human papillomavirus (hr-HPV). A major challenge for developing countries like Ghana has been the unavailability and costs of HPV DNA-based testing. This study compares the performance of careHPV, a semi-rapid and affordable qualitative detection assay for 14 hr-HPV genotypes, with HPV genotyping, for the detection of cytological cervical squamous intraepithelial lesions (SIL).

METHODS

A study comparing between frequency matched HIV-1 seropositive and HIV-seronegative women was conducted in the Cape Coast Teaching Hospital, Ghana. A systematic sampling method was used to select women attending clinics in the hospital. Cervical samples were tested for HPV by careHPV and Anyplex-II HPV28 genotyping assay, and by conventional cytology.

RESULTS

A total of 175 paired results (94 from HIV-1 seropositive and 81 from HIV-seronegative women) were analyzed based on the ability of both tests to detect the 14 hr-HPV types included in the careHPV assay. The inter-assay concordance was 94.3% (95%CI: 89.7-97.2%, kappa = 0.88), similar by HIV serostatus. The careHPV assay was equally sensitive among HIV-1 seropositive and seronegative women (97.3% vs. 95.7%, p = 0.50) and slightly more specific among HIV-seronegative women (85.0% vs. 93.1%, p = 0.10). careHPV had good sensitivity (87.5%) but low specificity (52.1%) for the detection of low SIL or greater lesions, but its performance was superior to genotyping (87.5 and 38.8%, respectively). Reproducibility of careHPV, tested on 97 samples by the same individual was 82.5% (95%CI: 73.4-89.4%).

CONCLUSIONS

The performance characteristics of careHPV compared to genotyping suggest that this simpler and cheaper HPV detection assay could offer a suitable alternative for HPV screening in Ghana.

The acceptability of vaginal smear self-collection for screening for cervical cancer: a systematic review

Cervical cancer is a major cause of death in adult women. However, many women do not undergo cervical cancer screening for the following reasons: fear, shame, physical limitations, cultural or religious considerations and lack of access to health care services. Self-collected vaginal smears maybe an alternative means of including more women in cervical cancer screening programs. The objective of this systematic review was to evaluate the acceptability of vaginal smear self-collection for cervical cancer screening. We selected articles from PubMed, the Cochrane Library and Embase that were published between January 1995 and April 2016. Studies written in English, French, Italian, Portuguese or Spanish that involved women between 18 and 69 years of age who had engaged in sexual intercourse were included in this review. The review was performed in accordance with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) statement. Nineteen studies were ultimately evaluated in this review. Most of the included studies (n=17) demonstrated that the self-collection method exhibited outstanding acceptability among women with respect to cervical cancer screening, and only two studies indicated that self-collection exhibited low acceptability among women in this context. The acceptability of self-collection was determined subjectively (without standardized questionnaires) in 10 studies (53%) and via structured and validated questionnaires in the remaining studies. The results of our review suggest that the self-collection method is well-accepted and may therefore encourage greater participation in cervical cancer screening programs. However, additional studies are required to verify these results.

Self-collected vaginal swabs for HPV screening: An exploratory study of rural Black Mississippi women

Objectives

To determine the post-procedure acceptability of self-collecting a vaginal swab for HPV testing among a highly impoverished and geographically isolated population of medically underserved Black women residing in the Mississippi Delta. Further, to test correlates of reporting that self-collection is preferred over Pap testing. Finally, to determine the prevalence of any of 13 high-risk HPV types among this population and the correlates of testing positive.

Methods

Eighty-eight women were recruited from two churches located in different towns of the Mississippi Delta. After completing a survey, women were provided instructions for self-collecting a cervico-vaginal swab and completing a post-collection survey. Specimens were tested for 13 oncogenic HPV types. Due to the exploratory nature of the study, significance was defined by a 0.15 alpha-level.

Results

Comfort levels with self-collection were high: 78.4% indicated a preference for self-collecting a specimen compared to Pap testing. Overall, 24 women (28.7%) tested positive for one or more of the 13 HPV types. Significant associations with testing positive were found for women having sex with females (P = 0.09), those never having an abnormal Pap (P = 0.06), younger women (P = 0.10), those with greater fatalism scores (P = 0.006), and those having less trust in doctors (P = 0.001).

Conclusions

Black rural women from the deep-south are generally comfortable self-collecting cervico-vaginal swabs for HPV testing. Given that nearly 30% tested positive for oncogenic HPV, and that fatalism as well a lack of trust in doctors predicted prevalence, a reasonable screening alternative to Pap testing may be community-based testing for HPV using self-collected vaginal swabs.

•

The majority reported they preferred HPV testing over having Pap tests.

•

Overall, 28.7% tested positive for one or more of the 13 HPV types.

•

The mean fatalism score was significantly and substantially greater for HPV + women.

•

Comfort in self-collecting was a strong correlate of preferring HPV testing.

Community-Based Screening for Cervical Cancer: A Feasibility Study of Rural Appalachian Women

OBJECTIVES

To describe women's comfort levels and perceptions about their experience self-collecting cervicovaginal swabs for human papillomavirus (HPV) testing, to determine whether nurse-guided patient navigation increases the odds of women receiving a traditional Papanicolaou (Pap) test after HPV screening, and to test the hypothesis that women testing positive for oncogenic HPV would be more likely to have a subsequent Pap test than those testing negative.

METHODS

A total of 400 women were recruited from 8 rural Appalachian counties, in 2013 and 2014. After completing a survey, women were provided instructions for self-collecting a cervicovaginal swab. Specimens were tested for 13 oncogenic HPV types. Simultaneously, women were notified of their test results and offered initial navigation for Pap testing. Chart-verified Pap testing within the next 6 months served as the end point.

RESULTS

Comfort levels with self-collection were high: 89.2% indicated that they would be more likely to self-collect a specimen for testing, on a regular basis, compared with Pap testing. Thirty women (7.5%) had a follow-up Pap test. Women receiving added nurse-guided navigation efforts were significantly less likely to have a subsequent test (P = 0.01). Women testing positive for oncogenic HPV were no more likely than those testing negative to have a subsequent Pap test (P = 0.27). Data were analyzed in 2014.

CONCLUSIONS

Rural Appalachian women are comfortable self-collecting cervicovaginal swabs for HPV testing. Furthermore, efforts to recontact women who have received an oncogenic HPV test result and an initial navigation contact may not be useful. Finally, testing positive for oncogenic HPV may not be a motivational factor for subsequent Pap testing.

HPV self-sampling in Japanese women: A feasibility study in a population with limited experience of tampon use

OBJECTIVES

Cervical cancer incidence and mortality is increasing in Japanese women under age 50. Screening uptake is low and proactive recommendations for human papillomavirus vaccination have been suspended. Other cervical cancer prevention initiatives are urgently needed. We assessed whether human papillomavirus self-sampling might be an acceptable alternative to physician-led screening, particularly in women with limited experience of tampon use. We also sought to identify any practical, logistical, or safety issues in women already attending for screening, before carrying out further large-scale studies in non-responders.

METHODS

In total, 203 women aged 20-49 attending their annual workplace healthcheck in Sapporo, northern Japan, performed unsupervised human papillomavirus self-sampling before undergoing a physician-led cervical smear and human papillomavirus test, and completing a measure of acceptability for both tests.

RESULTS

Ninety per cent of participants stated they would use self-sampling again. They found instructions easy to follow and reported no issues with the usability of the self-sampling device. Compared with physician-led testing, women found self-sampling significantly less painful, less embarrassing and could relax more (p < 0.001), regardless of history of tampon use, which was associated with negative experiences in physician sampling (p = 0.034). Women lacked confidence the test had been performed correctly, despite no unsatisfactory samples. No safety issues were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

Self-sampling was highly acceptable in this population of women. They could perform the test safely unsupervised, but lacked confidence the test has been carried out correctly. Japanese women need to be educated about the accuracy of human papillomavirus self-sampling and further large-scale studies are necessary in non-responders.

Randomized Intervention of Self-Collected Sampling for Human Papillomavirus Testing in Under-Screened Rural Women: Uptake of Screening and Acceptability

BACKGROUND

Our aim was to determine if cervical cancer screening uptake would increase among under-screened women living in rural Ontario, Canada, if at-home self-collected sampling for human papillomavirus (HPV) testing was offered as a primary cervical cancer screening modality, compared to invited papanicolaou (Pap) testing or routine opportunistic screening.

METHODS

Women 30-70 years of age who were overdue for cervical cancer screening were randomized to receive (1) an at-home self-collected HPV kit, (2) a reminder invitation for Pap testing, or (3) standard of care opportunistic screening. The first two arms were also asked demographic and screening history questions. Women randomized to arm 1 were asked about acceptability.

RESULTS

In total, 818 eligible women were identified in a small rural community in Southwestern Ontario: 335 received a self-collected HPV testing kit, 331 received a reminder letter, and 152 received standard of care. In the HPV self-collection arm, 21% (70/335) returned the sample and questionnaire and 11% (37/335) opted to undergo Pap testing. In total, 32% from the HPV self-collection arm, 15% (51/331) from the Pap invitation arm, and 8.5% (13/152) with standard of care were screened. Women receiving the self-collected HPV kit were 3.7 (95% confidence interval 2.2-6.4) times more likely to undergo screening compared to the standard of care arm. In the HPV self-sampling arm, 80% (56/70) said they would be very likely to choose self-collected sampling in the future.

CONCLUSIONS

Providing self-collected sampling for HPV testing was more effective than sending reminder letters to increase screening coverage in under-screened women.

Barriers and Facilitators to Cervical Cancer Screening Among Women in Rural Ontario, Canada: The Role of Self-Collected HPV Testing

PURPOSE

The addition of human papillomavirus (HPV) testing to primary cervical cancer screening provides an opportunity to employ less invasive cervical cancer screening modalities. The objective of this study was to explore the initial reaction and perception to HPV self-collected testing, in the context of current barriers and facilitators to cervical cancer screening, among women in an underscreened community in rural Ontario.

METHODS

Age-stratified focus groups were conducted with women 18-70 years of age in rural Ontario to discuss cervical cancer screening. Women were recruited using purposive sampling of underscreened women and women in the general community. Qualitative thematic analysis of focus group transcripts identified the barriers, facilitators, and role of HPV self-collected testing for cervical cancer screening.

RESULTS

Four focus groups were conducted with a total of 25 women. Overall, women were very positive toward self-collected HPV testing. HPV self-collected testing was felt to address many of the logistical (eg, inconvenient clinic hours, lack of time) and procedural barriers (embarrassment, lack of social distance in a small town) to current screening practices. However, self-collected HPV testing does not address barriers related to cervical cancer knowledge (eg, fear of cancer). Women identified issues related to test reliability, confidence in the ability to self-collect, and education around testing that would need to be addressed prior to implementation. Generational differences were noted in the acceptability of self-collected HPV testing between older and younger women.

CONCLUSIONS

HPV self-collected testing was perceived as a facilitator for screening, and it was well accepted in this rural community.

Feasibility of at-home self-sampling for HPV testing as an appropriate screening strategy for nonparticipants in Switzerland: preliminary results of the DEPIST study

OBJECTIVE

Nonattendees to cervical cancer screening are at a higher risk of developing cervical cancer. This study assessed women's willingness to perform a home-based self-sampling for human papillomavirus testing (Self-HPV) and explored the feasibility of establishing a home-based Self-HPV screening strategy in Switzerland.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Underscreened women (n = 158) who had not underwent a Pap test in the preceding 3 years were recruited between September 2011 and September 2013. Participants completed 2 questionnaires evaluating reasons for non-attendance at a screening program, sociodemographic issues, and satisfaction with and acceptability of the Self-HPV. Descriptive data and multivariate logistic regression were used to identify variables associated with women's willingness to perform at-home self-sampling for HPV testing.

RESULTS

Lack of time because of work or childcare was the most common reason for nonattendance at a screening program. One hundred six women (82%) preferred the Self-HPV because it is easy to perform, convenient, comfortable, and private. Women were more likely to accept the Self-HPV as a future screening strategy if they had missed cervical cancer screening in the past because of lack of time (odds ratio [OR] = 6.2, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.6-23.6; p < .01). Twenty-six women felt pain during self-sampling. Previous negative experiences with screening and stress during sampling were associated with higher risk for pain (OR = 7.14, 95% CI = 2.0-25.3, p < .01 and OR = 4.73, 95% CI = 1.5-14.5, p < .01, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

The Self-HPV was accepted by nonattendees of cervical cancer screening programs. Self-sampling may promote screening among the unscreened and underscreened population of women in Switzerland while overcoming some practical barriers.

Cervical cancer screening (Pap testing) behaviours and acceptability of human papillomavirus self-testing among lesbian and bisexual women aged 21-26 years in the USA

OBJECTIVE

Lesbian and bisexual women are at risk for human papillomavirus (HPV) infection and cervical disease. We examined cervical cancer screening (Pap testing) behaviours among these women and their acceptability of HPV self-testing at home, a potential cervical cancer screening strategy.

METHODS

We analysed data from a national sample of lesbian and bisexual women aged 21-26 years (n=418) who completed our online survey in Autumn 2013. Logistic regression identified correlates of (1) having had a Pap test in the last 3 years and (2) willingness to use an HPV self-test at home.

RESULTS

About 70% of women had undergone a Pap test in the last 3 years. Pap testing was more common among women who had disclosed their sexual orientation to their health care provider [odds ratio (OR)=2.01, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.02-3.95] and less common among women who self-identified as lesbian (OR=0.48, 95% CI 0.25-0.93). Just over half the women (51%) were willing to use an HPV self-test at home. Women were more willing to use an HPV self-test at home if they were older (OR=1.16, 95% CI 1.03-1.30) or reported higher levels of worry about getting an HPV-related disease (OR=1.28, 95% CI 1.01-1.63). The most common concerns about HPV self-testing at home were using the test incorrectly (70%) and test accuracy (64%).

CONCLUSIONS

Many young lesbian and bisexual women have not had a recent Pap test. HPV self-testing at home may be a promising future strategy for reaching and screening these women. Findings highlight beliefs and concerns that could be addressed by self-test programmes.