Katherine B Roland1, Vicki B Benard2, April Greek3, Nikki A Hawkins2, Mona Saraiya2. 1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Division of Cancer Prevention and Control, Epidemiology and Applied Research Branch, 4770 Buford Hwy NE, MS F-76, Atlanta, GA 30341, USA. Electronic address: kroland@cdc.gov. 2. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Division of Cancer Prevention and Control, Epidemiology and Applied Research Branch, 4770 Buford Hwy NE, MS F-76, Atlanta, GA 30341, USA. 3. Battelle, Health & Analytics, 1100 Dexter Ave N, Suite 400, Seattle, WA 98109, USA.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: In the United States, Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs) are safety-net clinics that provide cervical cancer screening and human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination to medically underserved women, some of whom may be at risk for developing cervical cancer. National guidelines recommend against using screening test results or sexual history to determine vaccine eligibility. Documenting HPV vaccine recommendations and beliefs of primary care providers in FQHCs may aid in promoting evidence-based practices and prioritizing health interventions for vulnerable populations. METHODS: Between 2009 and 2010, we collected data from 98 primary care providers in 15 FQHC clinics in IL, USA using a cross-sectional survey. Questions assessed provider and practice characteristics, HPV vaccine recommendations, and provider's belief about whether their screening and management procedures would change for women who were vaccinated. RESULTS: 93% of providers recommended the HPV vaccine, most frequently for females aged 13-26 years (98%). Some providers reported sometimes to always using HPV test results (12%), Pap test results (7%), and number of sexual partners (33%) to determine vaccine eligibility. More than half of providers (55%) reported they will not change their screening and management practices for vaccinated females, yet believe vaccination will yield fewer abnormal Pap tests (71%) and referrals for colposcopy (74%). CONCLUSION: Study providers routinely recommended the HPV vaccine for their patients. However, providers made fewer recommendations to vaccinate females ages 9-12 years (which includes the target age for vaccination) compared to older females, and used pre-vaccination assessments not recommended by U.S. guidelines, such as screening test results and number of sexual partners. In order to maximize the public health benefit of the HPV vaccine to prevent cervical cancer, adherence to guidelines is necessary, especially in settings that provide care to medically underserved women. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
INTRODUCTION: In the United States, Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs) are safety-net clinics that provide cervical cancer screening and human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination to medically underserved women, some of whom may be at risk for developing cervical cancer. National guidelines recommend against using screening test results or sexual history to determine vaccine eligibility. Documenting HPV vaccine recommendations and beliefs of primary care providers in FQHCs may aid in promoting evidence-based practices and prioritizing health interventions for vulnerable populations. METHODS: Between 2009 and 2010, we collected data from 98 primary care providers in 15 FQHC clinics in IL, USA using a cross-sectional survey. Questions assessed provider and practice characteristics, HPV vaccine recommendations, and provider's belief about whether their screening and management procedures would change for women who were vaccinated. RESULTS: 93% of providers recommended the HPV vaccine, most frequently for females aged 13-26 years (98%). Some providers reported sometimes to always using HPV test results (12%), Pap test results (7%), and number of sexual partners (33%) to determine vaccine eligibility. More than half of providers (55%) reported they will not change their screening and management practices for vaccinated females, yet believe vaccination will yield fewer abnormal Pap tests (71%) and referrals for colposcopy (74%). CONCLUSION: Study providers routinely recommended the HPV vaccine for their patients. However, providers made fewer recommendations to vaccinate females ages 9-12 years (which includes the target age for vaccination) compared to older females, and used pre-vaccination assessments not recommended by U.S. guidelines, such as screening test results and number of sexual partners. In order to maximize the public health benefit of the HPV vaccine to prevent cervical cancer, adherence to guidelines is necessary, especially in settings that provide care to medically underserved women. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
Entities:
Keywords:
Cervical cancer screening; Federally Qualified Health Center (FQHC); HPV vaccine; Low-income; Underserved
Authors: Vicki B Benard; Mona Saraiya; April Greek; Nikki A Hawkins; Katherine B Roland; Diane Manninen; Donatus U Ekwueme; Jacqueline W Miller; Elizabeth R Unger Journal: J Womens Health (Larchmt) Date: 2013-12-31 Impact factor: 2.681
Authors: Bernard Duval; Vladimir Gilca; Shelly McNeil; Simon Dobson; Deborah Money; Ian M Gemmill; Chantal Sauvageau; France Lavoie; Manale Ouakki Journal: Vaccine Date: 2007-09-14 Impact factor: 3.641
Authors: Susan T Vadaparampil; Teri L Malo; Jessica A Kahn; Daniel A Salmon; Ji-Hyun Lee; Gwendolyn P Quinn; Richard G Roetzheim; Karen L Bruder; Tina M Proveaux; Xiuhua Zhao; Neal A Halsey; Anna R Giuliano Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2014-01 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Jennifer L Young; Ruth G Bernheim; Jeffrey E Korte; Mark H Stoler; Thomas M Guterbock; Laurel W Rice Journal: J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol Date: 2011-09-09 Impact factor: 1.814
Authors: Debbie Saslow; Philip E Castle; J Thomas Cox; Diane D Davey; Mark H Einstein; Daron G Ferris; Sue J Goldie; Diane M Harper; Walter Kinney; Anna-Barbara Moscicki; Kenneth L Noller; Cosette M Wheeler; Terri Ades; Kimberly S Andrews; Mary K Doroshenk; Kelly Green Kahn; Christy Schmidt; Omar Shafey; Robert A Smith; Edward E Partridge; Francisco Garcia Journal: CA Cancer J Clin Date: 2007 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 508.702
Authors: Stacey A Fedewa; Vilma Cokkinides; Katherine S Virgo; Priti Bandi; Debbie Saslow; Elizabeth M Ward Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2012-06-28 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Manika Suryadevara; Joshua R Bonville; Rachael M Kline; Colleen Magowan; Elizabeth Domachowske; Donald A Cibula; Joseph B Domachowske Journal: Hum Vaccin Immunother Date: 2016-02-02 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: Caryn E Peterson; J Andrew Dykens; Noel T Brewer; Joanna Buscemi; Karriem Watson; DeLawnia Comer-Hagans; Zo Ramamonjiarivelo; Marian Fitzgibbon Journal: Transl Behav Med Date: 2016-12 Impact factor: 3.046