Women’s views on human papillomavirus self-sampling: focus groups to assess acceptability, invitation letters and a test kit in the Australian setting
Farhana Sultana A , Robyn Mullins B , Michael Murphy C , Dallas R. English A B , Julie A. Simpson A , Kelly T. Drennan D H , Stella Heley D , C. David Wrede E F , Julia M. L. Brotherton A D G , Marion Saville D and Dorota M. Gertig A D H I
+ Author Affiliations
- Author Affiliations
A Centre for Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, Level 3, 207 Bouverie Street, The University of Melbourne, Vic. 3010, Australia.
B Cancer Council Victoria, 615 St Kilda Road, Melbourne, Vic. 3004, Australia.
C Michael Murphy Research, 5/8A Dickens Street, Elwood, Vic. 3184, Australia.
D VCS Inc., 265 Faraday Street, Carlton, Vic. 3053, Australia.
E Royal Women’s Hospital, Locked Bag 300, Corner Flemington Road and Grattan Street, Parkville, Vic. 3052, Australia.
F Department of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, The University of Melbourne, 7th Floor, Royal Women’s Hospital, Corner Flemington Road and Grattan Street, Parkville, Vic. 3052 , Australia.
G National HPV Vaccination Program Register, Victorian Cytology Service, PO Box 310, East Melbourne, Vic. 3002, Australia.
H Victorian Cervical Cytology Registry, PO Box 161, Carlton South, Vic. 3053, Australia.
I Corresponding author. Email: dgertig@vcs.org.au
Sexual Health 12(4) 279-286 https://doi.org/10.1071/SH14236
Submitted: 11 December 2014 Accepted: 6 March 2015 Published: 1 June 2015
Abstract
Background: The study evaluated acceptability, invitation letters and the test kit for a trial of human papillomavirus (HPV) self-sampling among never- and under-screened women in Australia. Methods: Victorian women, 30–69 years, who had never had a Pap test or were overdue for one, participated. Four focus groups including eight to nine participants segmented by age (30–49 and 50–69 years) and screening history (never- and under-screened) were conducted in August 2013. Discussions were recorded and transcribed verbatim and data analysed using thematic content analysis. Results: The response to the concept of HPV self-sampling was positive. Decision-making was largely influenced by the content of a pre-invitation letter. Appealing features of self-sampling were cost (free), convenience (home-based) and anticipated less discomfort (with a swab) than a Pap test. Small kits that fit in mailboxes were preferred over post office parcel collection. The perceived barriers include concerns about test accuracy and lack of confidence that a home-based test would give the same results as a physician administered test. Women wanted information on the timing of receipt of the results and information about the organisation providing the test. Conclusion: HPV self-sampling is a possible alternative for Australian women who are reluctant to have a Pap test and may increase the likelihood of participation in cervical cancer screening if women’s concerns about it can be addressed. The findings of this study are relevant for researchers, policymakers and practitioners implementing self-sampling for under-screened women as part of cervical screening programs.
Additional keywords: communication materials, information needs, under-screened.
References
[1] Bos AB, Rebolj M, Habbema JD, van Ballegooijen M. Non-attendance is still the main limitation for the effectiveness of screening for cervical cancer in the Netherlands. Int J Cancer 2006; 119 2372–5.| Non-attendance is still the main limitation for the effectiveness of screening for cervical cancer in the Netherlands.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD28XhtVylsLrJ&md5=1eba16edad99596aa0ea97863f921f0aCAS | 16858676PubMed |
[2] Sasieni PD, Cuzick J, Lynch-Farmery E. Estimating the efficacy of screening by auditing smear histories of women with and without cervical cancer. The National Co-ordinating Network for Cervical Screening Working Group. Br J Cancer 1996; 73 1001–5.
| Estimating the efficacy of screening by auditing smear histories of women with and without cervical cancer. The National Co-ordinating Network for Cervical Screening Working Group.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DyaK283gtVChsw%3D%3D&md5=3431f847755bab485cf479bec10dbe3fCAS | 8611418PubMed |
[3] Szarewski A, Cadman L, Ashdown-Barr L, Waller J. Exploring the acceptability of two self-sampling devices for human papillomavirus testing in the cervical screening context: a qualitative study of Muslim women in London. J Med Screen 2009; 16 193–8.
| Exploring the acceptability of two self-sampling devices for human papillomavirus testing in the cervical screening context: a qualitative study of Muslim women in London.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 20054094PubMed |
[4] Waller J, Bartoszek M, Marlow L, Wardle J. Barriers to cervical cancer screening attendance in England: a population-based survey. J Med Screen 2009; 16 199–204.
| Barriers to cervical cancer screening attendance in England: a population-based survey.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 20054095PubMed |
[5] Oscarsson MG, Benzein EG, Wijma BE. Reasons for non-attendance at cervical screening as reported by non-attendees in Sweden. J Psychosom Obstet Gynaecol 2008; 29 23–31.
| Reasons for non-attendance at cervical screening as reported by non-attendees in Sweden.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 18266164PubMed |
[6] Arbyn M, Verdoodt F, Snijders PJ, Verhoef VMJ, Suonio E, Dillner L, Minozzi S, Bellisario C, Banzi R, Zhao F-H, Hillemanns P, Anttila A. Accuracy of human papillomavirus testing on self-collected versus clinician-collected samples: a meta-analysis. Lancet Oncol 2014; 15 172–83.
| Accuracy of human papillomavirus testing on self-collected versus clinician-collected samples: a meta-analysis.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 24433684PubMed |
[7] Sancho-Garnier H, Tamalet C, Halfon P, Leandri FX, Le Retraite L, Djoufelkit K, Heid P, Davies P, Piana L. HPV self-sampling or the Pap-smear: a randomized study among cervical screening nonattenders from lower socioeconomic groups in France. Int J Cancer 2013; 133 2681–7.
| 1:CAS:528:DC%2BC3sXhtFCisLrK&md5=5bbe5605072ba55f5ce0d09650cfc04fCAS | 23712523PubMed |
[8] Wikstrom I, Lindell M, Sanner K, Wilander E. Self-sampling and HPV testing or ordinary Pap-smear in women not regularly attending screening: a randomised study. Br J Cancer 2011; 105 337–9.
| Self-sampling and HPV testing or ordinary Pap-smear in women not regularly attending screening: a randomised study.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DC%2BC3MjhtlKhuw%3D%3D&md5=ab441a03495a3d0bcbf16d39acd818d9CAS | 21730977PubMed |
[9] Virtanen A, Nieminen P, Luostarinen T, Anttila A. Self-sample HPV tests as an intervention for nonattendees of cervical cancer screening in Finland: a randomized trial. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2011; 20 1960–9.
| Self-sample HPV tests as an intervention for nonattendees of cervical cancer screening in Finland: a randomized trial.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 21752985PubMed |
[10] Virtanen A, Anttila A, Luostarinen T, Nieminen P. Self-sampling versus reminder letter: effects on cervical cancer screening attendance and coverage in Finland. Int J Cancer 2011; 128 2681–7.
| Self-sampling versus reminder letter: effects on cervical cancer screening attendance and coverage in Finland.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BC3MXktVSgsbY%3D&md5=2391351173fea46c52ff552dfadc5202CAS | 20669228PubMed |
[11] Szarewski A, Cadman L, Mesher D, Austin J, Ashdown-Barr L, Edwards R, Lyons D, Walker J, Christison J, Frater A, Waller J. HPV self-sampling as an alternative strategy in non-attenders for cervical screening - a randomised controlled trial. Br J Cancer 2011; 104 915–20.
| HPV self-sampling as an alternative strategy in non-attenders for cervical screening - a randomised controlled trial.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DC%2BC3M3mvVKluw%3D%3D&md5=edb46e49d4f38acf5543db250fcd8cd0CAS | 21343937PubMed |
[12] Lazcano-Ponce E, Lorincz AT, Cruz-Valdez A, et al Self-collection of vaginal specimens for human papillomavirus testing in cervical cancer prevention (MARCH): a community-based randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2011; 378 1868–73.
| Self-collection of vaginal specimens for human papillomavirus testing in cervical cancer prevention (MARCH): a community-based randomised controlled trial.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 22051739PubMed |
[13] Giorgi Rossi P, Marsili LM, Camilloni L, et al The effect of self-sampled HPV testing on participation to cervical cancer screening in Italy: a randomised controlled trial (ISRCTN96071600). Br J Cancer 2011; 104 248–54.
| The effect of self-sampled HPV testing on participation to cervical cancer screening in Italy: a randomised controlled trial (ISRCTN96071600).Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DC%2BC3M7ivFamuw%3D%3D&md5=cf86940265111a82b8d15b05dcf0bfe9CAS | 21179038PubMed |
[14] Bais AG, van Kemenade FJ, Berkhof J, Verheijen RHM, Snijders PFJ, Voorhorst F, Babovis M, van Ballegooijen M, Helmerhorst TJM, Meijer CJLM. Human papillomavirus testing on self-sampled cervicovaginal brushes: an effective alternative to protect nonresponders in cervical screening programs. Int J Cancer 2007; 120 1505–10.
| Human papillomavirus testing on self-sampled cervicovaginal brushes: an effective alternative to protect nonresponders in cervical screening programs.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD2sXis12isLs%3D&md5=4cba7969b0465983dc24d2c8a930d4efCAS | 17205514PubMed |
[15] Gok M, van Kemenade FJ, Heideman DA, Berkhof J, Rozendaal L, Spruyt JML, Belien JAM, Babovic M, Snijders PJF, Meijer CJLM. Experience with high-risk human papillomavirus testing on vaginal brush-based self-samples of non-attendees of the cervical screening program. Int J Cancer 2012; 130 1128–35.
| Experience with high-risk human papillomavirus testing on vaginal brush-based self-samples of non-attendees of the cervical screening program.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 21484793PubMed |
[16] Dannecker C, Siebert U, Thaler CJ, Kiermeir D, Hepp H, Hillemanns P. Primary cervical cancer screening by self-sampling of human papillomavirus DNA in internal medicine outpatient clinics. Ann Oncol 2004; 15 863–9.
| Primary cervical cancer screening by self-sampling of human papillomavirus DNA in internal medicine outpatient clinics.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DC%2BD2c3lt1yqsQ%3D%3D&md5=64c49d2543d5d8cc826ef112c53df191CAS | 15151941PubMed |
[17] Pengsaa P, Vatanasapt V, Sriamporn S, Sanchaisuriya P, Schelp FP, Noda S, Kato S, Kongdee W, Kanchanawirojkul N, Aranyasen O. A self-administered device for cervical cancer screening in northeast Thailand. Acta Cytol 1997; 41 749–54.
| A self-administered device for cervical cancer screening in northeast Thailand.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DyaK2szhtVGhuw%3D%3D&md5=1750144597d3f1df1fb5a22385d02d98CAS | 9167696PubMed |
[18] Harper DM, Noll WW, Belloni DR, Cole BF. Randomized clinical trial of PCR-determined human papillomavirus detection methods: self-sampling versus clinician-directed–biologic concordance and women’s preferences. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2002; 186 365–73.
| Randomized clinical trial of PCR-determined human papillomavirus detection methods: self-sampling versus clinician-directed–biologic concordance and women’s preferences.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD38XivFCrsbo%3D&md5=d7edc6743f80c22748be4f9a31fbbdc7CAS | 11904593PubMed |
[19] Dzuba IG, Diaz EY, Allen B, et al The acceptability of self-collected samples for HPV testing vs. the Pap test as alternatives in cervical cancer screening. J Womens Health Gend Based Med 2002; 11 265–75.
| The acceptability of self-collected samples for HPV testing vs. the Pap test as alternatives in cervical cancer screening.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 11988136PubMed |
[20] Anhang R, Nelson JA, Telerant R, Chiasson MA, Wright TC. Acceptability of self-collection of specimens for HPV DNA testing in an urban population. J Womens Health 2005; 14 721–8.
| Acceptability of self-collection of specimens for HPV DNA testing in an urban population.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DC%2BD2MrlvVeruw%3D%3D&md5=b6b48d2452ce4e0359adfd2949def046CAS |
[21] Waller J, McCaffery K, Forrest S, Szarewski A, Cadman L, Austin J, Wardle J. Acceptability of unsupervised HPV self-sampling using written instructions. J Med Screen 2006; 13 208–13.
| 1:STN:280:DC%2BD2s%2Fit1ekug%3D%3D&md5=aae8a550dc5d1744ae3ad643fd83c979CAS | 17217611PubMed |
[22] Karwalajtys T, Howard M, Sellors JW, Kaczorowski J. Vaginal self sampling versus physician cervical sampling for HPV among younger and older women. Sex Transm Infect 2006; 82 337–9.
| Vaginal self sampling versus physician cervical sampling for HPV among younger and older women.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DC%2BD28vlsVejtA%3D%3D&md5=f11a4e33c2620dea34f798f57f912022CAS | 16877589PubMed |
[23] Khanna N, Mishra SI, Tian G, Tan MT, Arnold S, Lee C, Ramachandran S, Bell L, Baquet CR, Lorincz A. Human papillomavirus detection in self-collected vaginal specimens and matched clinician-collected cervical specimens. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2007; 17 615–22.
| Human papillomavirus detection in self-collected vaginal specimens and matched clinician-collected cervical specimens.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DC%2BD2s3ptlKhsQ%3D%3D&md5=dfb3c919587e88905e7620d20527ab4aCAS | 17504376PubMed |
[24] Stewart DE, Gagliardi A, Johnston M, Howlett R, Barata P, Lewis N, Oliver T, Mai V. Self-collected samples for testing of oncogenic human papillomavirus: a systematic review. J Obstet Gynaecol Can 2007; 29 817–28.
| 17915065PubMed |
[25] Nobbenhuis MA, Helmerhorst TJ, van den Brule AJ, Rozendaal L, Jaspars LH, Voorhorst FJ, Verheijen RHM, Meijer CJLM. Primary screening for high risk HPV by home obtained cervicovaginal lavage is an alternative screening tool for unscreened women. J Clin Pathol 2002; 55 435–9.
| Primary screening for high risk HPV by home obtained cervicovaginal lavage is an alternative screening tool for unscreened women.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DC%2BD38zhs1WrsA%3D%3D&md5=a1de95d60936b02175f71e4b6cb06d41CAS | 12037026PubMed |
[26] Forrest S, McCaffery K, Waller J, Desai M, Szarewski A, Cadman L, Wardle J. Attitudes to self-sampling for HPV among Indian, Pakistani, African-Caribbean and white British women in Manchester, UK. J Med Screen 2004; 11 85–8.
| Attitudes to self-sampling for HPV among Indian, Pakistani, African-Caribbean and white British women in Manchester, UK.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DC%2BD2c3lsFSqtQ%3D%3D&md5=a66812ca3435ceb1fc5b01cc447b8e95CAS | 15153323PubMed |
[27] Schmeink CE, Bekkers RL, Massuger LF, Melchers WJ. The potential role of self-sampling for high-risk human papillomavirus detection in cervical cancer screening. Rev Med Virol 2011; 21 139–53.
| The potential role of self-sampling for high-risk human papillomavirus detection in cervical cancer screening.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 21538664PubMed |
[28] Sultana F, English DR, Simpson JA, Brotherton JML, Drennan K, Mullins R, Heley S, Wrede CD, Saville M, Gertig DM. Rationale and design of the iPap trial: a randomized controlled trial of home-based HPV self-sampling for improving participation in cervical screening by never- and under-screened women in Australia. BMC Cancer 2014; 14 207
| Rationale and design of the iPap trial: a randomized controlled trial of home-based HPV self-sampling for improving participation in cervical screening by never- and under-screened women in Australia.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 24646201PubMed |
[29] Barata PC, Mai V, Howlett R, Gagliardi AR, Stewart DE. Discussions about self-obtained samples for HPV testing as an alternative for cervical cancer prevention. J Psychosom Obstet Gynaecol 2008; 29 251–7.
| Discussions about self-obtained samples for HPV testing as an alternative for cervical cancer prevention.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 18608824PubMed |
[30] Howard M, Lytwyn A, Lohfeld L, Redwood-Campbell L, Fowler N, Karwalajtys T. Barriers to acceptance of self-sampling for human papillomavirus across ethnolinguistic groups of women. Can J Public Health 2009; 100 365–9.
| 19994740PubMed |
[31] Kahn JA, Bernstein DI, Rosenthal SL, Huang B, Kollar LM, Colyer JL, Tissot AM, Hillard PA, Witte D, Groen P, Slap GB. Acceptability of human papillomavirus self testing in female adolescents. Sex Transm Infect 2005; 81 408–14.
| Acceptability of human papillomavirus self testing in female adolescents.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DC%2BD2MrlsFSntA%3D%3D&md5=55ab11e9ff9a47bb043eb2b44c882b29CAS | 16199741PubMed |
[32] Goldsmith MR, Bankhead CR, Kehoe ST, Marsh G, Austoker J. Information and cervical screening: a qualitative study of women’s awareness, understanding and information needs about HPV. J Med Screen 2007; 14 29–33.
| Information and cervical screening: a qualitative study of women’s awareness, understanding and information needs about HPV.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 17362569PubMed |
[33] McCaffery K, Irwig L. Australian women’s needs and preferences for information about human papillomavirus in cervical screening. J Med Screen 2005; 12 134–41.
| Australian women’s needs and preferences for information about human papillomavirus in cervical screening.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 16156944PubMed |
[34] Hendry M, Pasterfield D, Lewis R, Clements A, Damery S, Neal RD, Adke R, Weller D, Campbell C, Patnick J, Sasieni P, Hurt C, Wilson S, Wilkinson C. Are women ready for the new cervical screening protocol in England? A systematic review and qualitative synthesis of views about human papillomavirus testing. Br J Cancer 2012; 107 243–54.
| Are women ready for the new cervical screening protocol in England? A systematic review and qualitative synthesis of views about human papillomavirus testing.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DC%2BC38jhvV2ksg%3D%3D&md5=83fabaa9bea44af17325fdd4b632e9f3CAS | 22699825PubMed |
[35] Kwan TT, Cheung AN, Lo SS, Lee PWH, Tam KF, Chan KKL, Ngan HYS. Psychological burden of testing positive for high-risk human papillomavirus on women with atypical cervical cytology: a prospective study. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2011; 90 445–51.
| Psychological burden of testing positive for high-risk human papillomavirus on women with atypical cervical cytology: a prospective study.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 21306349PubMed |
[36] Papa D, Moore Simas TA, Reynolds M, Melnitsky H. Assessing the role of education in women’s knowledge and acceptance of adjunct high-risk human Papillomavirus testing for cervical cancer screening. J Low Genit Tract Dis 2009; 13 66–71.
| Assessing the role of education in women’s knowledge and acceptance of adjunct high-risk human Papillomavirus testing for cervical cancer screening.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 19387125PubMed |
[37] National Cervical Screening Program. National cervical screening program renewal. Canberra: Department of Health and Ageing, Australian Government; 2013.
