Literature DB >> 20669228

Self-sampling versus reminder letter: effects on cervical cancer screening attendance and coverage in Finland.

Anni Virtanen1, Ahti Anttila, Tapio Luostarinen, Pekka Nieminen.   

Abstract

Optimizing attendance and coverage of organized screening is needed to reduce cervical cancer incidence to previous lower levels. In our study, all nonparticipants in organized cervical cancer screening in 2008 in Espoo, Finland were randomized to receive a self-sampling kit (1,130 women) or a reminder letter (3,030 women). Effects on screening coverage were assessed according to the self-reported previous Pap smear history of the participants. Participation rate in the self-sampling arm, 29.8%, was significantly higher than in the reminder letter arm, 26.2% (adjusted relative risk for participation 1.13). Total participation in Espoo in 2008 rose significantly after the two interventions from 64.0 to 75.4%. In both arms, ∼ 20% of the participants after second intervention could be considered under screened (previous Pap smear ≥ 5 years ago) and thus increased screening coverage. Respectively, for 70-75%, the second intervention only provided overscreening. Participation was lowest among young age groups and immigrants, after primary invitation and after interventions. Our study shows that a second intervention for nonattendees after the first invitation is needed to optimize the attendance rates. Self-sampling might be slightly more successful in this, but the effects on screening coverage were similar in both groups.
Copyright © 2010 UICC.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20669228     DOI: 10.1002/ijc.25581

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Cancer        ISSN: 0020-7136            Impact factor:   7.396


  25 in total

Review 1.  Emerging role of HPV self-sampling in cervical cancer screening for hard-to-reach women: Focused literature review.

Authors:  Tina R Madzima; Mandana Vahabi; Aisha Lofters
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  2017-08       Impact factor: 3.275

2.  HPV self-sampling: A promising approach to reduce cervical cancer screening disparities in Canada.

Authors:  M Vahabi; A Lofters
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2018-02-28       Impact factor: 3.677

3.  Examining Acceptability of Self-Collection for Human Papillomavirus Testing Among Women and Healthcare Providers with a Broader Lens.

Authors:  Virginia Senkomago; Mona Saraiya
Journal:  J Womens Health (Larchmt)       Date:  2017-04-17       Impact factor: 2.681

4.  Acceptability and ease of use of mailed HPV self-collection among infrequently screened women in North Carolina.

Authors:  Chelsea Anderson; Lindsay Breithaupt; Andrea Des Marais; Charlotte Rastas; Alice Richman; Lynn Barclay; Noel T Brewer; Jennifer S Smith
Journal:  Sex Transm Infect       Date:  2017-09-02       Impact factor: 3.519

Review 5.  New strategies for human papillomavirus-based cervical screening.

Authors:  Attila Lorincz; Alejandra Castanon; Anita Wey Wey Lim; Peter Sasieni
Journal:  Womens Health (Lond)       Date:  2013-09

6.  Women's knowledge about cervical cancer risk factors, screening, and reasons for non-participation in cervical cancer screening programme in Estonia.

Authors:  Alice Kivistik; Katrin Lang; Paolo Baili; Ahti Anttila; Piret Veerus
Journal:  BMC Womens Health       Date:  2011-09-28       Impact factor: 2.809

Review 7.  Interventions targeted at women to encourage the uptake of cervical screening.

Authors:  Helen Staley; Aslam Shiraz; Norman Shreeve; Andrew Bryant; Pierre Pl Martin-Hirsch; Ketankumar Gajjar
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2021-09-06

8.  Consultation rates in cervical screening non-attenders: opportunities to increase screening uptake in GP primary care.

Authors:  Anita Wey Wey Lim; Peter Sasieni
Journal:  J Med Screen       Date:  2015-03-05       Impact factor: 2.136

9.  A second generation cervico-vaginal lavage device shows similar performance as its preceding version with respect to DNA yield and HPV DNA results.

Authors:  Viola M J Verhoef; Maaike G Dijkstra; Remko P Bosgraaf; Albertus T Hesselink; Willem J G Melchers; Ruud L M Bekkers; Johannes Berkhof; Folkert J van Kemenade
Journal:  BMC Womens Health       Date:  2013-05-02       Impact factor: 2.809

Review 10.  Methods to increase participation in organised screening programs: a systematic review.

Authors:  Laura Camilloni; Eliana Ferroni; Beatriz Jimenez Cendales; Annamaria Pezzarossi; Giacomo Furnari; Piero Borgia; Gabriella Guasticchi; Paolo Giorgi Rossi
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2013-05-13       Impact factor: 3.295

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.