INTRODUCTION: Cervical cancer is the second most common cancer in women worldwide. In countries like Mexico, cervical cancer early detection programs have had a minimal impact on the incidence and death rates from cervical cancer. Self-sampling for the presence of high-risk human papillomavirus is potentially a more effective screening tool to reach women who have limited access to community healthcare resources. The objective of this phase 2 trial was to establish if the fourth generation Preventive Oncology International/National Institutes of Health self-sampler device is well accepted by women of all socioeconomic levels in Michoacán, Mexico. METHODS: This is a prospective phase 2 trial. The patients used the self-sampler, and then the acceptability questionnaire (14 multiple choice questions) was completed with the assistance of nursing staff. RESULTS: Two thousand five hundred seventeen patients completed the questionnaire. The mean age of our patient population was 39 years. Eighty-six percent of patients reported being comfortable when using the self-test, and 76% preferred to do the test at the clinic. Ninety-one percent of patients said that if their only choice was to perform the test at home they would perform it rather than not perform the test. The major barriers for the use of self-sampler identified by the women in the study were fear (75%), woman might not perform the test because she does not feel ill (70%), women felt that husbands may stand in women's way of performing the test (66%), and lack of time (61%). Results differed by location but not by history of Papanicolaou test. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients reported being comfortable when using the Preventive Oncology International/National Institutes of Health fourth generation self-test. Most influential barriers identified by the acceptability questionnaire were fear, lack of signs or symptoms of illness, husbands' influence, cost, lack of time, being unable to read, and lack of trust in the medical community.
INTRODUCTION: Cervical cancer is the second most common cancer in women worldwide. In countries like Mexico, cervical cancer early detection programs have had a minimal impact on the incidence and death rates from cervical cancer. Self-sampling for the presence of high-risk human papillomavirus is potentially a more effective screening tool to reach women who have limited access to community healthcare resources. The objective of this phase 2 trial was to establish if the fourth generation Preventive Oncology International/National Institutes of Health self-sampler device is well accepted by women of all socioeconomic levels in Michoacán, Mexico. METHODS: This is a prospective phase 2 trial. The patients used the self-sampler, and then the acceptability questionnaire (14 multiple choice questions) was completed with the assistance of nursing staff. RESULTS: Two thousand five hundred seventeen patients completed the questionnaire. The mean age of our patient population was 39 years. Eighty-six percent of patients reported being comfortable when using the self-test, and 76% preferred to do the test at the clinic. Ninety-one percent of patients said that if their only choice was to perform the test at home they would perform it rather than not perform the test. The major barriers for the use of self-sampler identified by the women in the study were fear (75%), woman might not perform the test because she does not feel ill (70%), women felt that husbands may stand in women's way of performing the test (66%), and lack of time (61%). Results differed by location but not by history of Papanicolaou test. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients reported being comfortable when using the Preventive Oncology International/National Institutes of Health fourth generation self-test. Most influential barriers identified by the acceptability questionnaire were fear, lack of signs or symptoms of illness, husbands' influence, cost, lack of time, being unable to read, and lack of trust in the medical community.
Authors: Karen Haney; Pushpa Tandon; Rao Divi; Miguel R Ossandon; Houston Baker; Paul C Pearlman Journal: IEEE J Transl Eng Health Med Date: 2017-11-23 Impact factor: 3.316
Authors: Richard A Crosby; Michael E Hagensee; Robin Vanderpool; Nia Nelson; Adam Parrish; Tom Collins; Nebraska Jones Journal: Sex Transm Dis Date: 2015-11 Impact factor: 2.830
Authors: Carolina Porras; Allan Hildesheim; Paula González; Mark Schiffman; Ana Cecilia Rodríguez; Sholom Wacholder; Silvia Jiménez; Wim Quint; Diego Guillen; Aimée R Kreimer; Rolando Herrero Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2014-12-05 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Barrett Sewali; Kolawole S Okuyemi; Asli Askhir; Jerome Belinson; Rachel I Vogel; Anne Joseph; Rahel G Ghebre Journal: Cancer Med Date: 2015-02-04 Impact factor: 4.452
Authors: Pooja Bansil; Scott Wittet; Jeanette L Lim; Jennifer L Winkler; Proma Paul; Jose Jeronimo Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2014-06-12 Impact factor: 3.295