Literature DB >> 29507490

Strategies to reach marginalized women for cervical cancer screening: A qualitative study of stakeholder perspectives.

B Wood1,2,3, A Lofters2, M Vahabi3.   

Abstract

Background: Self-sampling for human papillomavirus (hpv) has the potential to reach marginalized populations that are underserved for cervical cancer screening. However, before implementing an alternative screening strategy such as self-sampling for under- and never-screened women, the key processes, facilitators, and barriers to reform need to be understood.
Methods: A descriptive qualitative study was conducted that involved semi-structured interviews with Canadian and international cancer screening health care providers and policy-makers. Respondents were purposively selected from a list of thirty stakeholders generated through an environmental scan. The interviews were transcribed verbatim and analyzed using directed content analysis.
Results: Nineteen stakeholders participated in the interviews. Most respondents thought that self-sampling was an appropriate cervical screening alternative for hard-to-reach populations, as it addressed barriers to cervical screening related to various social determinants of health. All respondents emphasized that transitioning to hpv primary screening would catalyze a policy shift towards self-sampling. Clinician respondents were less enthusiastic about self-sampling strategies since that discouraged women's appointments with primary care providers, because cervical screening offered an opportunity to discuss other preventive health topics. There also was little consensus between respondents on whether the state of evidence was satisfactory to integrate a self-sampling option into policy, or whether more Canadian research was needed.
Conclusion: Canadian cervical cancer screening stakeholders should collaborate to identify the knowledge gaps that researchers should address and leverage the existing literature to implement tailored, patient-centred alternative cervical screening strategies. The transition to hpv primary screening would be a key first step in the broad implementation of hpv self-sampling in Canada.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cervical cancer; barriers; cervical cancer screening; hpv self-sampling; social determinants of health; vulnerable population

Year:  2018        PMID: 29507490      PMCID: PMC5832295          DOI: 10.3747/co.25.3851

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Curr Oncol        ISSN: 1198-0052            Impact factor:   3.677


  38 in total

Review 1.  Reaching women who do not participate in the regular cervical cancer screening programme by offering self-sampling kits: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised trials.

Authors:  F Verdoodt; M Jentschke; P Hillemanns; C S Racey; P J F Snijders; M Arbyn
Journal:  Eur J Cancer       Date:  2015-08-18       Impact factor: 9.162

2.  Cervical cancer prevention in upper middle-income countries.

Authors:  Ana Cecilia Rodríguez; Jorge Salmerón
Journal:  Prev Med       Date:  2017-02-06       Impact factor: 4.018

3.  Cervical Cancer Screening.

Authors:  George F Sawaya; Karen Smith-McCune
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2016-03       Impact factor: 7.661

Review 4.  Self-collection for vaginal human papillomavirus testing: systematic review of studies asking women their perceptions.

Authors:  Jennifer Huynh; Michelle Howard; Alice Lytwyn
Journal:  J Low Genit Tract Dis       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 1.925

Review 5.  Accuracy of human papillomavirus testing on self-collected versus clinician-collected samples: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Marc Arbyn; Freija Verdoodt; Peter J F Snijders; Viola M J Verhoef; Eero Suonio; Lena Dillner; Silvia Minozzi; Cristina Bellisario; Rita Banzi; Fang-Hui Zhao; Peter Hillemanns; Ahti Anttila
Journal:  Lancet Oncol       Date:  2014-01-14       Impact factor: 41.316

6.  Primary cervical cancer screening with HPV testing compared with liquid-based cytology: results of round 1 of a randomised controlled trial -- the HPV FOCAL Study.

Authors:  G S Ogilvie; M Krajden; D J van Niekerk; R E Martin; T G Ehlen; K Ceballos; L W Smith; L Kan; D A Cook; S Peacock; G C E Stuart; E L Franco; A J Coldman
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2012-11-20       Impact factor: 7.640

7.  Code Saturation Versus Meaning Saturation: How Many Interviews Are Enough?

Authors:  Monique M Hennink; Bonnie N Kaiser; Vincent C Marconi
Journal:  Qual Health Res       Date:  2016-09-26

8.  Primary care physician characteristics associated with cancer screening: a retrospective cohort study in Ontario, Canada.

Authors:  Aisha K Lofters; Ryan Ng; Rebecca Lobb
Journal:  Cancer Med       Date:  2014-11-27       Impact factor: 4.452

Review 9.  The acceptability of vaginal smear self-collection for screening for cervical cancer: a systematic review.

Authors:  Natalia Serrano Doratioto Faria Braz; Noely Paula Cristina Lorenzi; Isabel Cristina Esposito Sorpreso; Lana Maria de Aguiar; Edmund Chada Baracat; José Maria Soares-Júnior
Journal:  Clinics (Sao Paulo)       Date:  2017-03       Impact factor: 2.365

10.  Reduced cervical cancer incidence and mortality in Canada: national data from 1932 to 2006.

Authors:  James A Dickinson; Agata Stankiewicz; Cathy Popadiuk; Lisa Pogany; Jay Onysko; Anthony B Miller
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2012-11-16       Impact factor: 3.295

View more
  3 in total

1.  IPVS policy statement. Equity in cervical cancer prevention: for all and not just for some.

Authors:  Julia Brotherton; Cristyn Davies
Journal:  Papillomavirus Res       Date:  2019-12-04

2.  Awareness and Support of Clinician- and Patient-Collected Human Papillomavirus Testing for Cervical Cancer Screening Among Primary Care Clinicians.

Authors:  Kathy L MacLaughlin; Robert M Jacobson; Jennifer L St Sauver; Gregory D Jenkins; Chun Fan; Lila J Finney Rutten
Journal:  Womens Health Rep (New Rochelle)       Date:  2022-01-07

3.  Self-collection for HPV-based cervical screening: a qualitative evidence meta-synthesis.

Authors:  Hawa Camara; Ye Zhang; Lise Lafferty; Andrew J Vallely; Rebecca Guy; Angela Kelly-Hanku
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2021-08-04       Impact factor: 3.295

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.