Literature DB >> 30481121

Understanding Patients' Perspectives and Information Needs Following a Positive Home Human Papillomavirus Self-Sampling Kit Result.

Jasmin A Tiro1, Andrea C Betts1,2, Kilian Kimbel3, Diana S M Buist3, Constance Mao4, Hongyuan Gao3, Lisa Shulman3, Colin Malone5, Tara Beatty3, John Lin6, Chris Thayer7, Diana L Miglioretti3,8, Rachel L Winer3,5.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: We explored patient perspectives after a positive human papillomavirus (HPV) self-sampling result to describe experiences and information needs for this home-based screening modality.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We recruited women who tested high-risk (hr) HPV positive during a pragmatic trial evaluating mailed hrHPV self-sampling kits as an outreach strategy for women overdue for Pap screening in a U.S. integrated health care system. Telephone interviews were conducted from 2014 to 2017. Five independent coders analyzed transcripts using iterative content analysis.
RESULTS: Forty-six women (61% of invited; median age 55.5 years) completed a semistructured interview. Six themes emerged: (1) convenience of home-based screening, (2) intense feelings and emotions after receiving positive kit results, (3) importance of seeing provider and discussing kit results, (4) information seeking from various sources, (5) confusion about purpose and meaning of HPV versus Pap tests, and (6) concern that HPV self-sampling is inaccurate when the subsequent Pap test is normal.
CONCLUSIONS: Although women liked the kit's convenience, discussion about discordant home HPV and in-clinic Pap results led them to question the accuracy of HPV self-sampling. Patient-provider communication around home HPV kits is more complex than for reflex or cotesting because clinician-collected Pap results are unknown at the time of the positive kit result. Patients need education about differences between HPV and Pap tests and how they are used for screening and follow-up. To reassure patients and keep them interested in self-sampling, education should be provided at multiple time points during the screening process.

Entities:  

Keywords:  early detection of cancer; human papillomavirus DNA tests; mass screening; qualitative research; uterine cervical neoplasms

Year:  2018        PMID: 30481121      PMCID: PMC6444912          DOI: 10.1089/jwh.2018.7070

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Womens Health (Larchmt)        ISSN: 1540-9996            Impact factor:   2.681


  10 in total

1.  Reactions of women underscreened for cervical cancer who received unsolicited human papillomavirus self-sampling kits.

Authors:  Colin Malone; Jasmin A Tiro; Diana Sm Buist; Tara Beatty; John Lin; Kilian Kimbel; Hongyuan Gao; Chris Thayer; Diana L Miglioretti; Rachel L Winer
Journal:  J Med Screen       Date:  2019-11-20       Impact factor: 2.136

2.  Cost-effectiveness studies of HPV self-sampling: A systematic review.

Authors:  Colin Malone; Ruanne V Barnabas; Diana S M Buist; Jasmin A Tiro; Rachel L Winer
Journal:  Prev Med       Date:  2020-01-03       Impact factor: 4.018

3.  Acceptability of Human Papilloma Virus Self-Sampling for Cervical Cancer Screening in a Cohort of Patients from Romania (Stage 2).

Authors:  Mihaela Grigore; Ingrid-Andrada Vasilache; Petru Cianga; Daniela Constantinescu; Odetta Duma; Roxana Daniela Matasariu; Ioana-Sadiye Scripcariu
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2022-04-29       Impact factor: 4.964

4.  "We are looking at the future right now": community acceptability of a home-based viral load test device in the context of HIV cure-related research with analytical treatment interruptions in the United States.

Authors:  Karine Dubé; John Kanazawa; Christopher Roebuck; Steven Johnson; William B Carter; Lynda Dee; Beth Peterson; Kenneth M Lynn; Linden Lalley-Chareczko; Emily Hiserodt; Sukyung Kim; Daniel Rosenbloom; Brad R Evans; Melanie Anderson; Daria J Hazuda; Lisa Shipley; Kevin Bateman; Bonnie J Howell; Karam Mounzer; Pablo Tebas; Luis J Montaner
Journal:  HIV Res Clin Pract       Date:  2022-03-29

5.  Information needs among women taking part in primary HPV screening in England: a content analysis.

Authors:  Laura Marlow; Alice S Forster; Emily McBride; Lauren Rockliffe; Henry Kitchener; Jo Waller
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2020-12-15       Impact factor: 2.692

6.  Preliminary Acceptability of a Home-Based Peripheral Blood Collection Device for Viral Load Testing in the Context of Analytical Treatment Interruptions in HIV Cure Trials: Results from a Nationwide Survey in the United States.

Authors:  Karine Dubé; Shadi Eskaf; Elizabeth Hastie; Harsh Agarwal; Laney Henley; Christopher Roebuck; William B Carter; Lynda Dee; Jeff Taylor; Derrick Mapp; Danielle M Campbell; Thomas J Villa; Beth Peterson; Kenneth M Lynn; Linden Lalley-Chareczko; Emily Hiserodt; Sukyung Kim; Daniel Rosenbloom; Brad R Evans; Melanie Anderson; Daria J Hazuda; Lisa Shipley; Kevin Bateman; Bonnie J Howell; Karam Mounzer; Pablo Tebas; Luis J Montaner
Journal:  J Pers Med       Date:  2022-02-07

7.  An online survey on emotions, impact on everyday life, and educational needs of women with HPV positivity or abnormal Pap smear result.

Authors:  Andrea Ciavattini; Giovanni Delli Carpini; Luca Giannella; Anna Del Fabro; Vivek Banerji; Genevieve Hall; Maggiorino Barbero; Francesco Sopracordevole
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2021-11-12       Impact factor: 1.817

8.  Testing positive for Human Papillomavirus (HPV) at primary HPV cervical screening: A qualitative exploration of women's information needs and preferences for communication of results.

Authors:  Sophie Mulcahy Symmons; Jo Waller; Emily McBride
Journal:  Prev Med Rep       Date:  2021-08-19

9.  Clinical follow-up practices after cervical cancer screening by co-testing: A population-based study of adherence to U.S. guideline recommendations.

Authors:  Rebecca B Perkins; Rachael Adcock; Vicki Benard; Jack Cuzick; Alan Waxman; Jean Howe; Stephanie Melkonian; Janis Gonzales; Charles Wiggins; Cosette M Wheeler
Journal:  Prev Med       Date:  2021-08-18       Impact factor: 4.018

10.  Participant experiences using novel home-based blood collection device for viral load testing in the HIV cure trials with analytical treatment interruptions.

Authors:  Karine Dubé; Harsh Agarwal; William B Carter; Lynda Dee; Jeff Taylor; Christopher Roebuck; Beth Peterson; Hursch Patel; Samuel Ndukwe; Kenneth M Lynn; Linden Lalley-Chareczko; Emily Hiserodt; Sukyung Kim; Daniel Rosenbloom; Brad R Evans; Melanie Anderson; Daria J Hazuda; Kevin Bateman; Bonnie J Howell; Livio Azzoni; Karam Mounzer; Pablo Tebas; Luis J Montaner
Journal:  HIV Res Clin Pract       Date:  2022-08-02
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.