Literature DB >> 26247260

Use of Smartphones as Adjuvant Tools for Cervical Cancer Screening in Low-Resource Settings.

Dominique Ricard-Gauthier1, Anna Wisniak, Rosa Catarino, Annabelle Faure van Rossum, Ulrike Meyer-Hamme, Raluca Negulescu, Stefano Scaringella, Jeromine Jinoro, Pierre Vassilakos, Patrick Petignat.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Our aim was to evaluate the feasibility and performance of smartphone digital images for the detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia of grade 2 or worse (CIN2+) as an adjunct to a conventional visual inspection approach with acetic acid (VIA) and Lugol's iodine (VILI), in comparison with detection by histopathologic examination.
METHODS: Three hundred women were primarily screened for human papillomavirus (HPV) using self-collected vaginal specimens. Human papillomavirus-positive women were then invited for VIA and VILI, which were interpreted as (i) nonpathological, (ii) pathological or, (iii) inconclusive. Cervical smearing, endocervical brushing, and cervical biopsies were performed. Digital images of the cervix were taken with a smartphone and evaluated offsite by experienced health care providers. Sensitivity and specificity for CIN2+ were compared between on-site and off-site observers, using histopathological diagnosis as the criterion standard.
RESULTS: Eighty-eight HPV-positive women were screened for cervical cancer. Overall, 7 cases of CIN2+ (8.0%) were diagnosed using biopsy specimens. The on-site physician obtained a sensitivity of 28.6% (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 3.7-71) and a specificity of 87.2% (95% CI, 77.7- 93.7). The off-site physicians obtained a sensitivity ranging between 42.9% (95% CI, 9.9-81.6; p = 1) and 85.7% (95% CI, 42.1-99.6; p = .13) and a specificity between 48.1% (95% CI, 36.5- 59.7; p < .001) and 79.2% (95% CI, 68.5-87.6; p = .10). Comparison between observers did not reach significance. Observers assessed 95.6% of all images as very good or acceptable for interpretation purpose.
CONCLUSION: Smartphone images may be a useful adjunct to conventional VIA and VILI for the detection of CIN2+ and improve cervical cancer screening in low-resource settings.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26247260     DOI: 10.1097/LGT.0000000000000136

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Low Genit Tract Dis        ISSN: 1089-2591            Impact factor:   1.925


  22 in total

Review 1.  Social Media and Mobile Technology for Cancer Prevention and Treatment.

Authors:  Judith J Prochaska; Steven S Coughlin; Elizabeth J Lyons
Journal:  Am Soc Clin Oncol Educ Book       Date:  2017

2.  Andriod Device-Based Cervical Cancer Screening for Resource-Poor Settings.

Authors:  Vidya Kudva; Keerthana Prasad; Shyamala Guruvare
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2018-10       Impact factor: 4.056

3.  Introduction to focused issue on mHealth and social media interventions for cancer.

Authors:  Steven S Coughlin
Journal:  Mhealth       Date:  2016-11-14

Review 4.  Mobile health solutions in developing countries: a stakeholder perspective.

Authors:  Emmanuel Eze; Rob Gleasure; Ciara Heavin
Journal:  Health Syst (Basingstoke)       Date:  2018-04-04

5.  Cervical cancer screening in low-resource settings: a smartphone image application as an alternative to colposcopy.

Authors:  Caroline Gallay; Anne Girardet; Manuela Viviano; Rosa Catarino; Anne-Caroline Benski; Phuong Lien Tran; Christophe Ecabert; Jean-Philippe Thiran; Pierre Vassilakos; Patrick Petignat
Journal:  Int J Womens Health       Date:  2017-06-22

6.  A Smartphone-Based Approach for Triage of Human Papillomavirus-Positive Sub-Saharan African Women: A Prospective Study.

Authors:  Esther Urner; Martine Delavy; Rosa Catarino; Manuela Viviano; Ulrike Meyer-Hamme; Anne-Caroline Benski; Jeromine Jinoro; Josea Lea Heriniainasolo; Manuela Undurraga; Hugo De Vuyst; Christophe Combescure; Pierre Vassilakos; Patrick Petignat
Journal:  JMIR Mhealth Uhealth       Date:  2017-05-29       Impact factor: 4.773

7.  A systematic review of handheld tools in lieu of colposcopy for cervical neoplasia and female genital schistosomiasis.

Authors:  Solrun Søfteland; Motshedisi Hannah Sebitloane; Myra Taylor; Borghild Barth Roald; Sigve Holmen; Hashini Nilushika Galappaththi-Arachchige; Svein Gunnar Gundersen; Eyrun Floerecke Kjetland
Journal:  Int J Gynaecol Obstet       Date:  2021-02-12       Impact factor: 3.561

8.  Cervical Cancer Prevention in Low- and Middle-Income Countries.

Authors:  Emma R Allanson; Kathleen M Schmeler
Journal:  Clin Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2021-09-01       Impact factor: 1.966

9.  Telephone interventions in adherence to receiving the Pap test report: a randomized clinical trial.

Authors:  Ana Izabel Oliveira Nicolau; Thaís Marques Lima; Camila Teixeira Moreira Vasconcelos; Francisco Herlânio Costa Carvalho; Priscila de Souza Aquino; Ana Karina Bezerra Pinheiro
Journal:  Rev Lat Am Enfermagem       Date:  2017-12-04

10.  Colposcopy telemedicine: live versus static swede score and accuracy in detecting CIN2+, a cross-sectional pilot study.

Authors:  Katayoun Taghavi; Dipanwita Banerjee; Ranajit Mandal; Helena Kopp Kallner; Malin Thorsell; Therese Friis; Ljiljana Kocoska-Maras; Björn Strander; Albert Singer; Elisabeth Wikström
Journal:  BMC Womens Health       Date:  2018-06-11       Impact factor: 2.809

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.