Search

Objective To explore reasons for variations in anxiety in women testing positive for human papillomavirus (HPV) with normal cytology at routine HPV primary cervical cancer screening. Methods In‐depth interviews were conducted with 30 women who had tested HPV‐positive with normal cytology, including 15 with low‐to‐normal anxiety and 15 with high anxiety. Data were analysed using Framework Analysis to compare themes between low and high anxiety groups. Results Several HPV‐related themes were shared across anxiety groups, but only highly anxious women expressed fear and worry, fatalistic cognitions about cancer, fertility‐related cognitions, adverse physiological responses and changes in health behaviour(s). In comparison to those with low anxiety, women with high anxiety more strongly voiced cognitions about the 12‐month wait for follow‐up screening, relationship infidelity, a lower internal locus of control and HPV‐related symptom attributions. Conclusions Receiving an HPV‐positive with normal cytology result related to various emotional, cognitive, behavioural and physiological responses; some of which were specific to, or more pronounced in, women with high anxiety. If our observations are confirmed in hypothesis‐driven quantitative studies, the identification of distinct themes relevant to women experiencing high anxiety can inform targeted patient communications and HPV primary screening implementation policy., Highlights To our knowledge, this is the first qualitative study to explore anxiety in women testing human papillomavirus (HPV)‐positive with normal cytology at routine HPV primary screening.Our comparative qualitative design allowed thematic nuances to emerge between women who had experienced low versus high anxiety following their result.Only highly anxious women expressed fear and worry, fatalistic cognitions about cancer, fertility‐related cognitions, adverse physiological responses and changes in health behaviour(s).Highly anxious women also more strongly voiced cognitions about the 12‐month wait for follow‐up screen, reltionship infidelity, a lower internal locus of control and HPV‐related symptom attributions.These distinct themes can be used to minimise unnecessary anxiety through the development of evidence‐based patient communications at HPV primary screening.

OBJECTIVE To assess psychosexual distress over a 12-month period among women receiving different human papillomavirus (HPV) and cytology results in the context of the English HPV primary screening pilot. DESIGN Longitudinal, between-group study. SETTING Five sites in England where primary HPV testing was piloted. POPULATION Women aged 24-65 years (n = 1133) who had taken part in the NHS Cervical Screening Programme. METHODS Women were sent a postal questionnaire soon after receiving their screening results (baseline) and 6 and 12 months later. Data were analysed using linear regression models to compare psychosexual outcomes between groups receiving six possible combinations of HPV and cytology screening results, including a control group with normal cytology and no HPV test. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Psychosexual distress, assessed using six items from the Psychosocial Effects of Abnormal Pap Smears Questionnaire (PEAPS-Q). RESULTS At all time points, there was an association between screening result group and psychosexual distress (all P

BackgroundHuman papillomavirus (HPV)-based cervical screening is now replacing cytology-based screening in several countries and many women in screening programmes will consequently receive HPV-positive results. Because of the sexually transmitted nature of HPV, receiving an HPV-positive result may raise questions about disclosing the infection to a sexual partner.ObjectiveTo review the quantitative and qualitative literature exploring women’s concerns about disclosing a high-risk cervical HPV infection to a sexual partner.MethodsWe searched MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL Plus, Web of Science and EMBASE for studies reporting at least one disclosure-related outcome among women with high-risk HPV. We also searched the grey literature and carried out forward/backward citation searches. A narrative synthesis for quantitative studies and a thematic synthesis for qualitative studies were conducted.ResultsThirteen articles met the inclusion criteria (12 qualitative, 1 quantitative). In the quantitative study, 60% of HPV-positive women felt disclosing an HPV result was ‘risky’. Concerns about disclosing HPV to a sexual partner were influenced by the stigma that is associated with having an STI and uncertainty about how their partner would respond. Women questioned how, when and to whom they should disclose their HPV-positive status.ConclusionsThe studies included in this review provide rich information about the range of concerns women have, the reasons for these concerns, and the questions women have about disclosing HPV to sexual partners. As studies were predominantly qualitative, the prevalence of concerns is unclear.

ObjectivesMany countries are implementing human papillomavirus (HPV)‐based cervical screening due to the higher sensitivity of the test compared with cytology. As HPV is sexually transmitted, there may be psychosexual consequences of testing positive for the virus. We aimed to review the literature exploring the psychosexual impact of testing positive for high‐risk cervical HPV.MethodsMEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL Plus, Web of Science, and EMBASE were searched with no date limits. We also searched the grey literature, reference lists of included articles and carried out forward citation searching. Eligible studies reported at least one psychosexual outcome among HPV‐positive women. Qualitative and quantitative papers were included. We extracted data using a standardised form and carried out a quality assessment for each article. We conducted a narrative synthesis for quantitative studies and a thematic synthesis for qualitative studies.ResultsTwenty‐five articles were included. Quantitative study designs were diverse making it difficult to determine the impact that an HPV positive result would have in the context of routine screening. The qualitative literature suggested that psychosexual concerns cover a broad range of aspects relating to women's current and past relationships, both interpersonal and sexual.ConclusionsThe psychosexual impact of testing positive for high‐risk cervical HPV is unclear. This review highlights the need for further research in the context of HPV‐based cervical screening. As primary HPV testing is introduced more widely, it is important to understand women's responses to testing HPV positive in the cancer screening context to minimise any adverse psychosexual impact.

Background In 2017, the Australian National Cervical Screening Program (NCSP) implemented five-yearly primary human papillomavirus (HPV) screening for women aged 25-74. It is important that clinicians are able to explain the NCSP changes to women and confidently address concerns. Aims This study examined Australian clinicians' attitudes toward and experiences of the NCSP renewal since its implementation. Materials and methods Cross-sectional survey of clinicians (general practitioners, obstetricians and gynaecologists) involved in cervical screening, distributed two years after implementation of the renewed NCSP. Responses were analysed using descriptive statistics and thematic analysis. Results Six hundred and seven participants completed the survey. More than 80% of clinicians were comfortable with the main NCSP changes: extended screening intervals, increased age of first screening, and screening test used. However, only 47% of clinicians reported having utilised the National Cancer Screening Register, and a third of clinicians did not believe that self-collection was a reasonable alternative to practitioner-collected screening for under-screened women. Increased demands for colposcopy were reported. All clinicians identified at least one area of educational need, including the management of women with a history of screen-detected abnormalities in the previous program (34.9%), post-colposcopy management for women with no abnormalities detected (25.5%), and screening in complex scenarios (eg immunocompromise) (26.5%). Conclusions Overall, Australian clinicians are comfortable with the main changes to the cervical screening program. Certain areas may require further policy review, such as screening in complex clinical scenarios, colposcopy availability, accessibility of the Register and self-collection. These issues could be meaningful for other countries switching to HPV-based screening.

BACKGROUND: Cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) is commonly used to treat cancer patients with psychological disorders such as depression. There has been little qualitative research exploring the experience of therapists delivering CBT to patients with advanced cancer and long-term health conditions generally. Therapists' views may help identify difficulties in delivering therapy and how these may be overcome. The aim of this study was to inform practice by qualitatively exploring the experiences of therapists delivering CBT to patients with advanced cancer. DESIGN: Sixteen semi-structured interviews were conducted with therapists from Increasing Access to Psychological Therapy (IAPT) services in London, UK, who had delivered CBT to patients enrolled on the CanTalk trial. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analysed using framework analysis. RESULTS: Therapists reported positive experiences when working with the target population. Flexibility, adaptability, and a consideration of individual needs were identified as important when delivering CBT, but the rigidity of IAPT policies and demand for services were perceived as problematic. Although therapists reported adequate training, specialist supervision was desired when delivering therapy to this complex population. CONCLUSION: IAPT therapists can deliver CBT to advanced cancer patients, given therapists positive experiences evident in the present study. However, it was concluded that additional service and modifications of therapy may be needed before positive outcomes for both therapists and patients can be achieved.

Background Sexual behavioural and health differences are known to exist between gay and bisexual men, but less is known about heterosexual-identifying men who have sex with men (MSM). We conducted a systematic review of articles reporting on this population to inform public health interventions. Methods We searched six databases for articles reporting sexual behaviour and health outcomes in heterosexual-identifying MSM in Western Europe, Australia, New Zealand and North America, from 2008 to January 2018. All were screened by a primary reviewer, 10% were screened by a second independent reviewer. Results From 3126 articles identified, 42 were quantitative and included in a narrative synthesis (40 reported on studies conducted in the USA). The majority reported data from MSM-focused studies; five were general population studies. HIV prevalence for heterosexual-identifying MSM (range across studies: 4.6–11.4%) was lower than for gay (11.2–43.8%) or bisexual (12.4–29.8%) MSM, however, fewer heterosexual-identifying MSM reported recent testing for HIV (40–49% vs 64–68% of gay men, 56–62% of bisexual men) or STIs. There was no difference by sexual identity in MSM’s reporting of recent condomless sex with casual male partners (42%–52% of those reporting recent sex with casual partners) or insertive condomless sex, however heterosexual-identifying MSM were less likely than gay MSM to report receptive condomless sex. They reported fewer recent male partners than gay or bisexual MSM, more recent female partners than gay MSM, and similar numbers of lifetime partners of either sex compared to gay or bisexual MSM. Conclusion Heterosexual-identifying MSM report fewer male partners than gay or bisexual MSM, however similarities in risk behaviours indicate a group at risk of poorer sexual health than the general population. The data also suggest inadequate sexual health service use by these men such that additional targeted approaches to health promotion and infection control for this population may be warranted. Disclosure No significant relationships.

Background Online sexual health research can be convenient, efficient and low cost, but there are debates about the adequacy of online informed consent, privacy, and the acceptability of different methods of follow-up. Objectives To explore women's views and experiences of the Contraception Choices feasibility trial procedures and the place of digital interventions for contraception decision making. Methods We analysed data from two sources: (1) Qualitative interviews. Eighteen interviews were conducted with women who had taken part in the Contraception Choices pre-trial feasibility study, to evaluate recruitment and online trial procedures. (2) Free-text comments. Women in the main Contraception Choices randomised controlled trial were followed up at 3 and 6 months, and asked ‘Please tell us what you liked or disliked about the website’ and ‘Has being in the study had any good or bad effects on your life?’ A total of 387 and 414 comments were made at 3 and 6 months respectively. Data were analysed thematically. Results Participants liked being involved in a study about contraception, although recruitment from an abortion clinic was less acceptable than in other sexual health settings. Women found the trial procedures straightforward, and expressed no major concerns about online self-registration, informed consent or online data collection. Online survey questions about contraception and fertility were acceptable, and participants liked the convenience of being followed up by email or text. Conclusions Participants appreciated the advantages of the online research design and did not express concerns about consent or privacy. Women would welcome digital interventions for contraception in a variety of settings.

Objective To explore people's responses to narrative information in the context of colorectal cancer screening. Design Nineteen in‐depth interviews were conducted with men and women (aged 45–59). Participants were given two types of colorectal screening information to read: factual and narrative. Participants gave their views on both types of information. Data were analysed using Framework Analysis. Results The most frequent responses to the narrative information were that they were reassuring, made colorectal screening more vivid, participants could relate to the people in the stories and they liked the range of narratives presented. Despite the narrative information being seen as more persuasive by some, this was not regarded as manipulative or negative. Both types of information were seen as equally credible. Participants felt a combination of facts and narratives would be useful when considering an offer of colorectal cancer screening. Conclusion Overall, participants were positive about the addition of narrative information to the currently provided factual information about colorectal cancer screening. Supplementing existing factual information with narrative information may provide participants with a more complete understanding of participation in colorectal cancer screening when considering an offer to be screened.