Racquel E Kohler1,2, Tamara Elliott3, Barati Monare3, Neo Moshashane3, Kehumile Ramontshonyana3, Pritha Chatterjee1, Doreen Ramogola-Masire3,4, Chelsea Morroni2,3,5. 1. Social and Behavioral Sciences, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA. 2. Botswana Harvard AIDS Institute Partnership, Gaborone, Botswana. 3. Botswana UPenn Partnership, Gaborone, Botswana. 4. Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Botswana, Gaborone, Botswana. 5. International Sexual and Reproductive Health, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, UK.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess the acceptability and preferences of HPV screening with self-sampling and mobile phone results delivery among women living with HIV (WLWH) in Botswana, as an alternative to traditional speculum screening. METHODS: WLWH aged 25 years or older attending an infectious disease clinic in Gaborone were enrolled in a cross-sectional study between March and April 2017. Women self-sampled with a flocked swab, had a speculum exam, and completed an interviewer-administered questionnaire about screening acceptability, experiences, and preferences. RESULTS: Of the 104 WLWH recruited, 98 (94%) had a history of traditional screening. Over 90% agreed self-sampling was easy and comfortable. Ninety-five percent were willing to self-sample again; however, only 19% preferred self-sampling over speculum exam for future screening. Preferences differed by education and residence with self-sampling being considered more convenient, easier, less embarrassing, and less painful. Speculum exams were preferred because of trust in providers' skills and women's low self-efficacy to sample correctly. Almost half (47%) preferred to receive results via mobile phone call. Knowledge of cervical cancer did not affect preferences. CONCLUSION: HPV self-sampling is acceptable among WLWH in Botswana; however, preferences vary. Although self-sampling is an important alternative to traditional speculum screening, education and support will be critical to address women's low self-efficacy to self-sample correctly.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the acceptability and preferences of HPV screening with self-sampling and mobile phone results delivery among women living with HIV (WLWH) in Botswana, as an alternative to traditional speculum screening. METHODS:WLWH aged 25 years or older attending an infectious disease clinic in Gaborone were enrolled in a cross-sectional study between March and April 2017. Women self-sampled with a flocked swab, had a speculum exam, and completed an interviewer-administered questionnaire about screening acceptability, experiences, and preferences. RESULTS: Of the 104 WLWH recruited, 98 (94%) had a history of traditional screening. Over 90% agreed self-sampling was easy and comfortable. Ninety-five percent were willing to self-sample again; however, only 19% preferred self-sampling over speculum exam for future screening. Preferences differed by education and residence with self-sampling being considered more convenient, easier, less embarrassing, and less painful. Speculum exams were preferred because of trust in providers' skills and women's low self-efficacy to sample correctly. Almost half (47%) preferred to receive results via mobile phone call. Knowledge of cervical cancer did not affect preferences. CONCLUSION:HPV self-sampling is acceptable among WLWH in Botswana; however, preferences vary. Although self-sampling is an important alternative to traditional speculum screening, education and support will be critical to address women's low self-efficacy to self-sample correctly.
Authors: C William Wester; Hermann Bussmann; Ava Avalos; Ndwapi Ndwapi; Tendani Gaolathe; Peter Cardiello; Christine Bussmann; Howard Moffat; Patson Mazonde; Richard G Marlink Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2005-03-07 Impact factor: 9.079
Authors: Paul A Harris; Robert Taylor; Robert Thielke; Jonathon Payne; Nathaniel Gonzalez; Jose G Conde Journal: J Biomed Inform Date: 2008-09-30 Impact factor: 6.317
Authors: Erin Moses; Heather N Pedersen; Sheona M Mitchell; Musa Sekikubo; David Mwesigwa; Joel Singer; Christine Biryabarema; Josaphat K Byamugisha; Deborah M Money; Gina S Ogilvie Journal: Trop Med Int Health Date: 2015-06-28 Impact factor: 2.622
Authors: Alicea M Mingo; Catherine A Panozzo; Yumi Taylor DiAngi; Jennifer S Smith; Andrew P Steenhoff; Doreen Ramogola-Masire; Noel T Brewer Journal: Int J Gynecol Cancer Date: 2012-05 Impact factor: 3.437
Authors: Scott Dryden-Peterson; Memory Bvochora-Nsingo; Gita Suneja; Jason A Efstathiou; Surbhi Grover; Sebathu Chiyapo; Doreen Ramogola-Masire; Malebogo Kebabonye-Pusoentsi; Rebecca Clayman; Abigail C Mapes; Neo Tapela; Aida Asmelash; Heluf Medhin; Akila N Viswanathan; Anthony H Russell; Lilie L Lin; Mukendi K A Kayembe; Mompati Mmalane; Thomas C Randall; Bruce Chabner; Shahin Lockman Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2016-11-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Victoria Crofts; Emmanuel Flahault; Pierre-Marie Tebeu; Sarah Untiet; Gisèle Kengne Fosso; Michel Boulvain; Pierre Vassilakos; Patrick Petignat Journal: Int J Womens Health Date: 2015-02-02