Eric Chamot1, Chishimba Mulambia, Sharon Kapambwe, Sadeep Shrestha, Groesbeck P Parham, Mubiana Macwan'gi, Mulindi H Mwanahamuntu. 1. 1Department of Epidemiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL; 2Institute of Economic and Social Research, University of Zambia; 3Centre for Infectious Disease Research in Zambia; and 4Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Teaching Hospital, Lusaka, Zambia; and 5Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to assess the conditions under which Zambian women with a history of cervical cancer screening by visual inspection with acetic acid might switch to human papillomavirus-based testing in the future. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a choice-based conjoint survey in a sample of women recently screened by visual inspection in Lusaka, Zambia. The screening attribute considered in hypothetical-choice scenarios included screening modality, sex and age of the examiner, whether screening results would be presented visually, distance from home to the clinic, and wait time for results. RESULTS: Of 238 women in the sample, 208 (87.4%) provided responses sufficiently reliable for analysis. Laboratory testing on a urine sample was the preferred screening modality, followed by visual screening, laboratory testing on a self-collected vaginal specimen, and laboratory testing on a nurse-collected cervical specimen. Market simulation suggested that only 39.7% (95% CI = 33.8-45.6) of the respondents would prefer urine testing offered by a female nurse in her 30s over visual inspection of the cervix conducted by a male nurse in his 20s if extra wait time were as short as 1 hour and the option of viewing how their cervix looks like were not available. CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests that, for some women, the level of preference for human papillomavirus-based screening strategies may depend highly on the process and conditions of service delivery.
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to assess the conditions under which Zambian women with a history of cervical cancer screening by visual inspection with acetic acid might switch to human papillomavirus-based testing in the future. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a choice-based conjoint survey in a sample of women recently screened by visual inspection in Lusaka, Zambia. The screening attribute considered in hypothetical-choice scenarios included screening modality, sex and age of the examiner, whether screening results would be presented visually, distance from home to the clinic, and wait time for results. RESULTS: Of 238 women in the sample, 208 (87.4%) provided responses sufficiently reliable for analysis. Laboratory testing on a urine sample was the preferred screening modality, followed by visual screening, laboratory testing on a self-collected vaginal specimen, and laboratory testing on a nurse-collected cervical specimen. Market simulation suggested that only 39.7% (95% CI = 33.8-45.6) of the respondents would prefer urine testing offered by a female nurse in her 30s over visual inspection of the cervix conducted by a male nurse in his 20s if extra wait time were as short as 1 hour and the option of viewing how their cervix looks like were not available. CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests that, for some women, the level of preference for human papillomavirus-based screening strategies may depend highly on the process and conditions of service delivery.
Authors: John F P Bridges; A Brett Hauber; Deborah Marshall; Andrew Lloyd; Lisa A Prosser; Dean A Regier; F Reed Johnson; Josephine Mauskopf Journal: Value Health Date: 2011-04-22 Impact factor: 5.725
Authors: S Tisci; Y H Shen; D Fife; J Huang; J Goycoolea; C P Ma; J Belinson; Rui-De Huang; Y L Qiao Journal: J Low Genit Tract Dis Date: 2003-04 Impact factor: 1.925
Authors: Heather L White; Chishimba Mulambia; Moses Sinkala; Mulindi H Mwanahamuntu; Groesbeck P Parham; Linda Moneyham; Diane M Grimley; Eric Chamot Journal: Soc Sci Med Date: 2012-03-07 Impact factor: 4.634
Authors: Donna E Stewart; Anna Gagliardi; Mary Johnston; Robbi Howlett; Paula Barata; Nancy Lewis; Thomas Oliver; Verna Mai Journal: J Obstet Gynaecol Can Date: 2007-10
Authors: P Giorgi Rossi; L M Marsili; L Camilloni; A Iossa; A Lattanzi; C Sani; C Di Pierro; G Grazzini; C Angeloni; P Capparucci; A Pellegrini; M L Schiboni; A Sperati; M Confortini; C Bellanova; A D'Addetta; E Mania; C B Visioli; E Sereno; F Carozzi Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2010-12-21 Impact factor: 7.640