Back to Search Start Over

Experience with HPV self-sampling and clinician-based sampling in women attending routine cervical screening in the Netherlands

Authors :
Nienke J. Veldhuijzen
Chris J.L.M. Meijer
Henrica C.W. de Vet
Nicole J Polman
Leon F.A.G. Massuger
Folkert J. van Kemenade
Yanne de Haan
Johannes Berkhof
Daniƫlle A M Heideman
Pathology
Epidemiology and Data Science
Amsterdam Neuroscience - Cellular & Molecular Mechanisms
APH - Methodology
AII - Infectious diseases
Source :
Preventive Medicine, 125, 5-11. Academic Press Inc., Preventive Medicine, 125, 5-11, Polman, N J, de Haan, Y, Veldhuijzen, N J, Heideman, D A M, de Vet, H C W, Meijer, C J L M, Massuger, L F A G, van Kemenade, F J & Berkhof, J 2019, ' Experience with HPV self-sampling and clinician-based sampling in women attending routine cervical screening in the Netherlands ', Preventive Medicine, vol. 125, pp. 5-11 . https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2019.04.025, Preventive Medicine, 125, pp. 5-11, Preventive Medicine, 125, 5-11. Academic Press
Publication Year :
2019
Publisher :
Academic Press, 2019.

Abstract

Several countries offer HPV self-sampling for screening non-attendees. It is assumed that screening attendees also prefer self-sampling to clinician-based sampling, however, little research has been conducted with respect to this. Women participating in the IMPROVE-study were randomised (1:1) to self- or clinician-collected HPV testing, and HPV-positive women were retested using the other collection method. Three different questionnaires were sent out among a subset of participating women: Q1) HPV-positive women from both study groups were asked about their experiences with self-sampling and clinician-based sampling (n = 497); Q2) HPV-negative women from the self-sampling group were asked about their experiences with self-sampling (n = 2366); and Q3) HPV-negative women in the clinician-collection group were asked about their experiences with clinician-based sampling (n = 2092). Response rates ranged from 71.6 to 79.4%. Women reported significantly lower levels of shame, nervousness, discomfort and pain during self-sampling compared to clinician-based sampling. However, trust in correct sampling was significantly higher during clinician-based sampling. The majority of women in group Q1 preferred self-sampling (76.5%) to clinician-based sampling (11.9%) in future screening, while 11.6% of women reported to have no preference for either method. To conclude, women from a regular screening population have a positive attitude towards self-sampling but express some concerns with respect to accuracy. The majority prefers self-sampling to clinician-based sampling in future screening. Based on these results, a screening approach where women can choose for either self-sampling or clinician-based sampling seems highly justifiable.

Details

ISSN :
10960260 and 00917435
Volume :
125
Database :
OpenAIRE
Journal :
Preventive Medicine
Accession number :
edsair.doi.dedup.....449b610b1cb50603c50ab75b631ecf40