Acceptability and Feasibility of Human Papilloma Virus Self-Sampling for Cervical Cancer Screening

Ilangovan, Kumar; Kobetz, Erin; Koru‐Sengul, Tulay; Marcus, Erin N.; Rodriguez, Brendaly; Alonzo, Yisel; Carrasquillo, Olveen

doi:10.1089/jwh.2015.5469

Cited by 41 publications

(60 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Several well-conducted US studies have implemented HPV self-testing through community health workers and other direct-interaction approaches. 23–27,41 Direct one-to-one engagement has many strengths, but requires considerable personnel time and effort. Our approach has the potential to require fewer resources per woman screened.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mailed Human Papillomavirus Self-Collection With Papanicolaou Test Referral for Infrequently Screened Women in the United States

Smith¹,

Marais²,

Deal³

et al. 2018

Sexual Trans Dis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Testing for high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) infection using mailed, self-collected samples is a promising approach to increase screening in women who do not attend clinic screening at recommended intervals. Methods To assess this intervention among high-risk women in the United States, 429 women without a Papanicolaou (Pap) test in 4 or more years (overdue by US guidelines) were recruited from the general population. Participants aged 30 to 65 years were mailed a kit to self-collect a cervicovaginal sample at home, return the sample by mail, and receive HPV results by telephone, with referral to follow-up cytological Pap testing at a local clinic. Cervicovaginal self-samples were collected with a Viba brush, stored in Scope mouthwash, and tested by Hybrid Capture 2. Data were collected in 2010 to 2011 and analyzed in 2017. Results Two-thirds (64%) of participants returned a self-collected sample, of whom 15% tested HPV DNA positive. Human papillomavirus self-test–positive women reported higher rates of follow-up Pap tests (82%) than did those with self-test negative results (51%). No demographic differences were found in self-test return rate or HPV positivity. High acceptability was reported in participant surveys: most women (81%) had “mostly positive” overall thoughts about the self-test, and most reported being comfortable receiving the kit in the mail (99%), returning their self-collected sample by mail (82%), and receiving their test results by telephone (97%). Conclusions Conducting HPV self-testing through population-based recruitment, mailed kit delivery and return by mail, and results delivery by telephone has the potential to reach a broad segment of US underscreened women.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mailed Human Papillomavirus Self-Collection With Papanicolaou Test Referral for Infrequently Screened Women in the United States

Smith¹,

Marais²,

Deal³

et al. 2018

Sexual Trans Dis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Recent evidence suggests that vaginal self‐obtained samples provide sensitivity and specificity equal to clinician‐collected specimens for detecting high‐risk HPV types and cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2+ . HPV self‐testing acceptability, feasibility and satisfaction studies among Indigenous and ethnic minority women found that HPV self‐testing is preferable to cervical cytology, and potentially eliminates barriers to cervical screening …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Acceptability of self‐taken vaginal HPV sample for cervical screening among an under‐screened Indigenous population

Adcock

Cram²,

Lawton

et al. 2019

Aust NZ J Obst Gynaeco

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Human papillomavirus (HPV), the causative agent of cervical cancer, can be screened for using self-collected vaginal samples (self-testing). This may overcome barriers to screening for Māori women who suffer a greater burden of cervical disease than New Zealand European women. Aims:This study aimed to explore the potential acceptability of HPV self-testing for never/under-screened (self-reported no cervical screen in 4+ years, aged 25+) Māori women by Kaupapa Māori (by, with and for Māori) mixed methods, involving hui (focus groups/interviews) and survey. Materials and Methods:Community-based researchers ran hui with women in four regions (N = 106) and supported hui participants to collect survey data (N = 397). Healthcare providers (HCPs) were also interviewed (N = 17). Hui data were thematically analysed. Survey data were analysed by age group, rural/urban, primary health organisation (PHO) enrolment, and time since last cervical screen.Results: Most survey participants were PHO-enrolled (87.15%) and attended regularly (71.79%), but did not attend regular cervical screening. A desire for bodily autonomy, including whakamā (embarrassment/shyness/reticence), was the most frequently cited barrier. Three in four women reported being likely/very likely to do an HPV self-test. Nine in ten women reported being likely/very likely to attend follow up if they receive a positive HPV test result. Women and HCPs in the hui emphasised the importance of health literacy, cultural competence and empathetic support. Conclusion:The findings indicate that with a culturally competent introduction of HPV self-testing, many currently never/under-screened Māori women would be willing to be screened and followed up if necessary. HPV self-testing has the potential to save lives. K E Y W O R D Scervical screening, HPV self-sampling, HPV self-testing, Indigenous health, Kaupapa Māori

show abstract

“…on subgroup-specific attitudes and beliefs about self-collection (De Alba et al, 2008;Forrest et al, 2004;Howard et al, 2009;Ilangovan et al, 2016;Lofters et al, 2017;Montealegre, Mullen, Jibaja-Weiss, Vargas Mendez, & Scheurer, 2015;Vahabi & Lofters, 2016;Virtanen et al, 2014) all the way through regional and national implementation with subgroup analysis for differences in uptake depending on delivery method (Kobetz et al, 2018;Tranberg et al, 2018). Three studies focused on CCS completion rates in the self-collection group versus standard clinic-based collection (Sewali et al, 2015;Virtanen et al, 2015;Virtanen, Anttila, Luostarinen, & Nieminen, 2011).…”

Section: Ta B L E 1 (Continued)mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The most frequently noted time frame was 10 years, more or less, living in the country of resettlement (Barbee et al, 2010;Lofters et al, 2017;Montealegre et al, 2015;Sewali et al, 2015). Only Ilangovan et al (2016) reported on the citizenship status of their study participants. The authors from only two of the 15 articles provided analysis of the relationship between length of time a participant had lived in the country of resettlement, or citizenship status, with specific outcome measures (Barbee et al, 2010;Sewali et al, 2015).…”

Section: Length Of Residence In Country Of Resettlementmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There was inconsistency in instruments used to collect data from participants making it difficult to compare these findings across studies. The authors of three studies reported that the qualitative questions about health behaviors used were adapted from previous surveys and translated into the appropriate language(s) for their study participants (Barbee et al, 2010;Ilangovan et al, 2016;Virtanen et al, 2014).…”

Section: Data Collection Instrumentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Self‐collection of samples for HPV testing to increase participation in cervical cancer screening by immigrant women: An integrative review

Elmore

Laughon

Mitchell

2020

Public Health Nursing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective To examine methods and results of studies assessing self‐collection of cervico‐vaginal samples for human papillomavirus (HPV) testing by immigrant women for insights into how future research using this method with unique subpopulations of women may improve the rates of cervical cancer screening (CCS) compared to current strategies. Data Sources Four electronic databases were systematically searched through March 2020, with no limits applied. A manual review of reference lists was also completed. Study Selection The search resulted in 63 articles. After removal of duplicates, 36 were reviewed against inclusion criteria. A manual review of reference lists yielded two additional studies. The final sample included 15 relevant publications representing 13 unique empirical studies. Data Extraction Data related to study methodology and empirical results were extracted into table form. Data Synthesis The methods of the studies were summarized and synthesized, including diversity of participants, community engagement, including collaboration with public health nurses or community health workers. In addition, methods and findings related to the educational components of the studies, and empirical findings related to various cultural groups, were described. Conclusion To reduce health disparities in CCS, researchers should focus on diverse groups, such as immigrant women, to understand important individual and group‐specific factors that may influence screening, including whether self‐collection of samples for HPV testing along with appropriate education and support for follow‐up will address these factors.

show abstract

Acceptability and Feasibility of Human Papilloma Virus Self-Sampling for Cervical Cancer Screening

Abstract: HPV self-sampling was both acceptable and feasible to participants and clinic staff and may help overcome barriers to screening.

Cited by 41 publications

References 43 publications

Mailed Human Papillomavirus Self-Collection With Papanicolaou Test Referral for Infrequently Screened Women in the United States

Mailed Human Papillomavirus Self-Collection With Papanicolaou Test Referral for Infrequently Screened Women in the United States

Acceptability of self‐taken vaginal HPV sample for cervical screening among an under‐screened Indigenous population

Self‐collection of samples for HPV testing to increase participation in cervical cancer screening by immigrant women: An integrative review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About