Incorporation of human papillomavirus self-sampling into the revised National Cervical Screening Program: a qualitative study of GP experiences and attitudes in rural New South Wales
Yun Megan Foo A * , Pragya Goswami A * , James Grogin A * , Elizabeth Hargan A * , Meera Thangarajah A * , Tegan Dutton
A B , Sandra Mendel A and Jannine Bailey A
A Bathurst Rural Clinical School, Western Sydney University, PO Box 9008, Bathurst, NSW 2795, Australia.
B Corresponding author. Email: Tegan.Dutton@westernsydney.edu.au
Australian Journal of Primary Health 27(4) 284-290 https://doi.org/10.1071/PY20209
Submitted: 9 September 2020 Accepted: 15 February 2021 Published: 14 May 2021
Abstract
Human papillomavirus self-sampling is part of the revised Australian National Cervical Screening Program for eligible under- or never-screened women. Although research demonstrates self-sampling as an acceptable method from the perspective of women, little is known about GP experiences and perspectives of this new screening alternative. This study sought to explore the experiences and perspectives of rural GPs towards the revised National Cervical Screening Program and the new self-sampling option. Semistructured qualitative interviews were completed with 12 GPs in central west New South Wales. The study found that GPs had limited experience facilitating self-sampling. The limited provision of education, difficulty accessing testing kits, poor availability of accredited laboratories and unclear rebate guidelines hindered their capacity to offer self-sampling. GPs reported uncertainty around patient eligibility and the quality of self-collected samples. GPs explained that self-sampling could increase cervical screening participation among some women, but because it is only available to complete in a general practice, it would not benefit those who are disengaged from health services. Despite GPs’ limited experience with facilitating self-sampling to date, they were optimistic about potential increases in cervical screening rates. Clearer articulation of specific program details and the evidence underpinning the program changes would reduce clinician uncertainty regarding the practicalities of how to incorporate patient-collected sampling into their daily practice, as well as the quality of patient-collected samples compared with clinician-collected samples. GPs must also be supported at a systems level to ensure there are processes in place to enable easy access to kits, laboratories, Medicare rebates and relevant support.
Keywords: general practitioners, public health, rural health, women’s health.
References
Arbyn M, Smith SB, Temin S, Sultana F, Castle P (2018) Detecting cervical precancer and reaching underscreened women by using HPV testing on self samples: updated meta-analyses. British Medical Journal (Clinical Research Ed.) 363, k4823Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW) (2019) Cervical Screening in Australia. (Australian Government: Canberra, ACT, Australia). Available at https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/cancer-screening/cervical-screening-in-australia-2019/contents/table-of-contents [Verified 3 September 2020]
Binns PL, Condon JR (2006) Participation in cervical screening by Indigenous women in the Northern Territory: a longitudinal study. The Medical Journal of Australia 185, 490–494.
| Participation in cervical screening by Indigenous women in the Northern Territory: a longitudinal study.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 17137453PubMed |
Cancer Australia (2020) Cervical Screening Rates. (Australian Government: Canberra, ACT, Australia) Available at https://ncci.canceraustralia.gov.au/screening/cervical-screening-rates/cervical-screening-rates [Verified 3 September 2020]
Colorafi KJ, Evans B (2016) Qualitative descriptive methods in health science research. Health Environments Research and Design Journal 9, 16–25.
| Qualitative descriptive methods in health science research.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 26791375PubMed |
Coory MD, Muller JM, Dunn NAM, Fagan PS (2002) Participation in cervical cancer screening by women in rural and remote Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities in Queensland. The Medical Journal of Australia 177, 544–547.
| Participation in cervical cancer screening by women in rural and remote Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities in Queensland.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 12429002PubMed |
Department of Health (2020a) National Cervical Screening Program Policies. (Australian Government; Canberra, ACT, Australia) Available at http://www.cancerscreening.gov.au/internet/screening/publishing.nsf/Content/national-cervical-screening-program-policies [Verified 3 September 2020]
Department of Health (2020b) DoctorConnect. (Australian Government: Canberra, ACT, Australia) Available at https://www.health.gov.au/initiatives-and-programs/doctorconnect?utm_source=doctorconnect.gov.au&utm_medium=redirect&utm_campaign=digital_transformation [Verified 3 September 2020]
Dutton T, Marjoram J, Burgess S, Montgomery L, Vail A, Callan N, Jacob S, Hawkes D, Saville M, Bailey J (2020) Uptake and acceptability of human papillomavirus self-sampling in rural and remote Aboriginal communities: evaluation of a nurse-led community engagement model. BMC Health Services Research 20, 398
| Uptake and acceptability of human papillomavirus self-sampling in rural and remote Aboriginal communities: evaluation of a nurse-led community engagement model.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 32393243PubMed |
Health Stats NSW (2018) Cervical cancer screening, Western NSW LHD, NSW 2006 to 2016. (NSW Government; NSW, Australia) Available at http://www.healthstats.nsw.gov.au/Indicator/can_cervscr/can_cervscr_lhn_trend [Verified 3 September 2020]
Holmes C, Mills J, Chamberlain-Salaun J (2014) Practice nurses and cervical screening: A two-country review. International Journal of Nursing Practice 20, 53–59.
| Practice nurses and cervical screening: A two-country review.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 24580976PubMed |
Karjalainen L, Anttila A, Nieminen P, Luostarinen T, Virtanen A (2016) Self-sampling in cervical cancer screening: comparison of a brush-based and a lavage-based cervicovaginal self-sampling device. BMC Cancer 16, 221
| Self-sampling in cervical cancer screening: comparison of a brush-based and a lavage-based cervicovaginal self-sampling device.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 26979237PubMed |
Koliopoulos G, Nyaga VN, Santesso N, Bryant A, Martin-Hirsch PPL, Mustafa RA, Schunemann H, Paraskevaidos E, Arbyn M (2017) Cytology versus HPV testing for cervical cancer screening in the general population. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews CD008587
| Cytology versus HPV testing for cervical cancer screening in the general population.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Peto J, Gilham C, Fletcher O, Matthews FE (2004) The cervical cancer epidemic that screening has prevented in the UK. Lancet 364, 249–256.
| The cervical cancer epidemic that screening has prevented in the UK.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 15262102PubMed |
Saville M, Hawkes D, McLachlan E, Anderson S, Arabena K (2018) Self-collection for under-screened women in a National Cervical Screening Program: pilot study. Current Oncology (Toronto, Ont.) 25, 27–32.
| Self-collection for under-screened women in a National Cervical Screening Program: pilot study.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Saville M, Hawkes D, Keunga MHT, Ip ELO, Silvers J, Sultana F, Malloy MJ, Velentzis LS, Canfel K, Wrede CD, Brotherton JML (2020) Analytical performance of HPV assays on vaginal self-collected vs practitioner-collected cervical samples: the SCoPE study. Journal of Clinical Virology 127, 104375
| Analytical performance of HPV assays on vaginal self-collected vs practitioner-collected cervical samples: the SCoPE study.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 32361328PubMed |
Snijders PJ, Verhoef VM, Arbyn M, Ogilvie G, Minozzi S, Banzi R, Van Kemenade FJ, Heideman DAM, Meijer CJLM (2013) High-risk HPV testing on self-sampled versus clinician-collected specimens: a review on the clinical accuracy and impact on population attendance in cervical cancer screening. International Journal of Cancer 132, 2223–2236.
| High-risk HPV testing on self-sampled versus clinician-collected specimens: a review on the clinical accuracy and impact on population attendance in cervical cancer screening.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 22907569PubMed |
Suanda J, Suanda J, Cawley D, Domegan C, Brenner M, Rowan N (2013) A review of the perceived barriers within the Health Belief Model on pap smear screening as a cervical cancer prevention measure. Journal of Asian Scientific Research 3, 677–692.
Sultana F, Roeske L, Malloy MJ, McDermott TL, Saville M, Brotherton JML (2020) Implementation of Australia’s renewed cervical screening program: preparedness of general practitioners and nurses. PLoS One 15, e0228042
| Implementation of Australia’s renewed cervical screening program: preparedness of general practitioners and nurses.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 31995585PubMed |
Western NSW Primary Health Network (2019) Health Profile 2019. (Western NSW Primary Health Network: Dubbo, NSW, Australia)
Williams D, Davies M, Fiander A, Farewell D, Hillier S, Brain K (2017) Women’s perspectives on human papillomavirus self-sampling in the context of the UK cervical screening programme. Health Expectations 20, 1031–1040.
| Women’s perspectives on human papillomavirus self-sampling in the context of the UK cervical screening programme.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 28186384PubMed |
