Literature DB >> 31522376

Acceptance of Self-Sampling Among Long-Term Cervical Screening Non-Attenders with HPV-Positive Results: Promising Opportunity for Specific Cancer Education.

Sonia Andersson1, Karen Belkić2,3,4, Miriam Mints1,5, Ellinor Östensson1.   

Abstract

This study aims to investigate acceptance of vaginal self-sampling for high-risk human papilloma virus (HPV) among long-term screening non-attenders at increased cervical cancer risk and to identify leverage points to promote screening adherence among these women. Forty-three long-term screening non-attenders performed home vaginal self-sampling for HPV, had positive HPV results, and subsequently attended gynecologic examination. Sixteen (37.2%) had high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN2 or 3), and two had invasive cervical cancer. Forty-one of these women completed a questionnaire concerning Specific Knowledge about HPV, CIN, and cervical cancer, potential barriers to screening and views about self-sampling. Results were compared with 479 women treated for CIN2+ who attended gynecologic follow-up and also performed self-sampling. Significant multivariate predictors of long-term non-attender status compared with referents were low Specific Knowledge, high confidence in self-sampling, and potential barriers-refraining from activity to attend gynecologic examination, needing another's help to attend, and long travel time. Non-attenders citing fear/refraining from gynecologic examination as why they preferred self-sampling significantly more often had lowest Specific Knowledge compared with other non-attenders. All non-attenders could envision themselves doing self-sampling again while only 74% of referents endorsed this statement (p = 0.0003). We conclude that HPV self-sampling is an acceptable option for women at increased cervical cancer risk who have been long-term screening non-attenders. Educational outreach to enhance Specific Knowledge about HPV, CIN and cervical cancer is critical. Those non-attenders who explicitly avoid gynecologic examinations need special attention. Trial Registry: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02750124.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cervical cancer screening; HPV testing; Leverage points; Selfcollection; Specific knowledge

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 31522376      PMCID: PMC7835166          DOI: 10.1007/s13187-019-01608-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Cancer Educ        ISSN: 0885-8195            Impact factor:   2.037


  24 in total

1.  Reasons for non-attendance at cervical screening as reported by non-attendees in Sweden.

Authors:  Marie G Oscarsson; Eva G Benzein; Barbro E Wijma
Journal:  J Psychosom Obstet Gynaecol       Date:  2008-03       Impact factor: 2.949

2.  Cervical cancer screening in Europe: Quality assurance and organisation of programmes.

Authors:  K Miriam Elfström; Lisen Arnheim-Dahlström; Lawrence von Karsa; Joakim Dillner
Journal:  Eur J Cancer       Date:  2015-03-25       Impact factor: 9.162

3.  The Association Between Unwanted Sexual Experiences and Early-Onset Cervical Cancer and Precancer by Age 25: A Case-Control Study.

Authors:  Yasmin Leela Jayasinghe; Victoria Sasongko; Rachel Wenrui Lim; Sonia Regina Grover; Sepehr N Tabrizi; Elya E Moore; Susan Donath; Suzanne Marie Garland
Journal:  J Womens Health (Larchmt)       Date:  2016-11-17       Impact factor: 2.681

4.  Evaluation of Entertainment Education Strategies to Promote Cervical Cancer Screening and Knowledge in Colombian Women.

Authors:  Roland Lincoln Boyden Lamb; Sara Milena Ramos Jaraba; Valentina Graciano Tangarife; Isabel C Garcés-Palacio
Journal:  J Cancer Educ       Date:  2018-10       Impact factor: 2.037

Review 5.  Global Cancer in Women: Burden and Trends.

Authors:  Lindsey A Torre; Farhad Islami; Rebecca L Siegel; Elizabeth M Ward; Ahmedin Jemal
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2017-02-21       Impact factor: 4.254

6.  HPV for cervical cancer screening (HPV FOCAL): Complete Round 1 results of a randomized trial comparing HPV-based primary screening to liquid-based cytology for cervical cancer.

Authors:  Gina S Ogilvie; Mel Krajden; Dirk van Niekerk; Laurie W Smith; Darrel Cook; Kathy Ceballos; Marette Lee; Laura Gentile; Lovedeep Gondara; Ruth Elwood-Martin; Stuart Peacock; Gavin Stuart; Eduardo L Franco; Andrew J Coldman
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  2016-10-20       Impact factor: 7.396

7.  Barriers and Facilitators to Cervical Cancer Screening Among Women in Rural Ontario, Canada: The Role of Self-Collected HPV Testing.

Authors:  C Sarai Racey; Dionne C Gesink
Journal:  J Rural Health       Date:  2015-08-12       Impact factor: 4.333

8.  Understanding cervical screening non-attendance among ethnic minority women in England.

Authors:  L A V Marlow; J Wardle; J Waller
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2015-07-14       Impact factor: 7.640

9.  Factors Affecting Cervical Cancer Screening Behaviors Based On the Precaution Adoption Process Model: A Qualitative Study.

Authors:  Afshin Bahmani; Mohammah Hossein Baghianimoghadam; Behnaz Enjezab; Seyed Saeed Mazloomy Mahmoodabad; Mohsen Askarshahi
Journal:  Glob J Health Sci       Date:  2015-11-17

10.  Perceived cervical cancer risk among women treated for high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: The importance of specific knowledge.

Authors:  Sonia Andersson; Karen Belkić; Selin Safer Demirbüker; Miriam Mints; Ellinor Östensson
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-12-22       Impact factor: 3.240

View more
  4 in total

1.  Clinical performance and acceptability of self-collected vaginal and urine samples compared with clinician-taken cervical samples for HPV testing among women referred for colposcopy. A cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Dorthe Ørnskov; Kirsten Jochumsen; Pernille Husted Steiner; Ivan Moulun Grunnet; Annemette Wildfang Lykkebo; Marianne Waldstrøm
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2021-03-05       Impact factor: 2.692

2.  Self-sampling for high-risk human papillomavirus as a follow-up alternative after treatment of high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia.

Authors:  Ellinor Östensson; Karen Belkić; Torbjörn Ramqvist; Miriam Mints; Sonia Andersson
Journal:  Oncol Lett       Date:  2021-01-31       Impact factor: 2.967

Review 3.  Preferences and Experiences Regarding the Use of the Self-Sampling Device in hrHPV Screening for Cervical Cancer.

Authors:  Marjolein Dieleman; Jolien de Waard; G Bea A Wisman; Ed Schuuring; Martha D Esajas; Karin M Vermeulen; Geertruida H de Bock
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2021-09-24       Impact factor: 3.883

4.  Predictors of treatment failure for adenocarcinoma in situ of the uterine cervix: Up to 14 years of recorded follow-up.

Authors:  Karen Belkić; Sonia Andersson; Susanna Alder; Miriam Mints; David Megyessi
Journal:  Oncol Lett       Date:  2022-08-25       Impact factor: 3.111

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.