Acceptability of self-collected versus provider-collected sampling for HPV DNA testing among women in rural El Salvador

Alan J. Rosenbaum, Julia C. Gage, Karla M. Alfaro, Lauren R. Ditzian, Mauricio Maza, Isabel C. Scarinci, Juan C. Felix, Philip E. Castle, Sofia Villalta, Esmeralda Miranda, Miriam L. Cremer

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

23 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective To determine the acceptability of self-collected versus provider-collected sampling among women participating in public sector HPV-based cervical cancer screening in El Salvador. Methods Two thousand women aged 30-49 years underwent self-collected and provider-collected sampling with careHPV between October 2012 and March 2013 (Qiagen, Gaithersburg, MD, USA). After sample collection, a random sample of women (n = 518) were asked about their experience. Participants were questioned regarding sampling method preference, previous cervical cancer screening, HPV and cervical cancer knowledge, HPV risk factors, and demographic information. Results All 518 women approached to participate in this questionnaire study agreed and were enrolled, 27.8% (142 of 511 responding) of whom had not received cervical cancer screening within the past 3 years and were considered under-screened. Overall, 38.8% (n = 201) preferred self-collection and 31.9% (n = 165) preferred provider collection. Self-collection preference was associated with prior tubal ligation, HPV knowledge, future self-sampling preference, and future home-screening preference (P < 0.05). Reasons for self-collection preference included privacy/embarrassment, ease, and less pain; reasons cited for provider-collection preference were result accuracy and provider knowledge/experience. Conclusion Self-sampling was found to be acceptable, therefore screening programs could consider offering this option either in the clinic or at home. Self-sampling at home may increase coverage in low-resource countries and reduce the burden that screening places upon clinical infrastructure.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)156-160
Number of pages5
JournalInternational Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics
Volume126
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - 2014
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

El Salvador
Uterine Cervical Neoplasms
Early Detection of Cancer
DNA
Tubal Sterilization
Privacy
Public Sector
Demography
Pain

Keywords

  • Acceptability
  • Cervical cancer
  • HPV
  • Latin America
  • Self-sampling

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Obstetrics and Gynecology
  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Acceptability of self-collected versus provider-collected sampling for HPV DNA testing among women in rural El Salvador. / Rosenbaum, Alan J.; Gage, Julia C.; Alfaro, Karla M.; Ditzian, Lauren R.; Maza, Mauricio; Scarinci, Isabel C.; Felix, Juan C.; Castle, Philip E.; Villalta, Sofia; Miranda, Esmeralda; Cremer, Miriam L.

In: International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Vol. 126, No. 2, 2014, p. 156-160.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Rosenbaum, AJ, Gage, JC, Alfaro, KM, Ditzian, LR, Maza, M, Scarinci, IC, Felix, JC, Castle, PE, Villalta, S, Miranda, E & Cremer, ML 2014, 'Acceptability of self-collected versus provider-collected sampling for HPV DNA testing among women in rural El Salvador', International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics, vol. 126, no. 2, pp. 156-160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijgo.2014.02.026
Rosenbaum, Alan J. ; Gage, Julia C. ; Alfaro, Karla M. ; Ditzian, Lauren R. ; Maza, Mauricio ; Scarinci, Isabel C. ; Felix, Juan C. ; Castle, Philip E. ; Villalta, Sofia ; Miranda, Esmeralda ; Cremer, Miriam L. / Acceptability of self-collected versus provider-collected sampling for HPV DNA testing among women in rural El Salvador. In: International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics. 2014 ; Vol. 126, No. 2. pp. 156-160.
@article{0b0611d2ed054c4cbf4cd6dfb3cdc275,
title = "Acceptability of self-collected versus provider-collected sampling for HPV DNA testing among women in rural El Salvador",
abstract = "Objective To determine the acceptability of self-collected versus provider-collected sampling among women participating in public sector HPV-based cervical cancer screening in El Salvador. Methods Two thousand women aged 30-49 years underwent self-collected and provider-collected sampling with careHPV between October 2012 and March 2013 (Qiagen, Gaithersburg, MD, USA). After sample collection, a random sample of women (n = 518) were asked about their experience. Participants were questioned regarding sampling method preference, previous cervical cancer screening, HPV and cervical cancer knowledge, HPV risk factors, and demographic information. Results All 518 women approached to participate in this questionnaire study agreed and were enrolled, 27.8{\%} (142 of 511 responding) of whom had not received cervical cancer screening within the past 3 years and were considered under-screened. Overall, 38.8{\%} (n = 201) preferred self-collection and 31.9{\%} (n = 165) preferred provider collection. Self-collection preference was associated with prior tubal ligation, HPV knowledge, future self-sampling preference, and future home-screening preference (P < 0.05). Reasons for self-collection preference included privacy/embarrassment, ease, and less pain; reasons cited for provider-collection preference were result accuracy and provider knowledge/experience. Conclusion Self-sampling was found to be acceptable, therefore screening programs could consider offering this option either in the clinic or at home. Self-sampling at home may increase coverage in low-resource countries and reduce the burden that screening places upon clinical infrastructure.",
keywords = "Acceptability, Cervical cancer, HPV, Latin America, Self-sampling",
author = "Rosenbaum, {Alan J.} and Gage, {Julia C.} and Alfaro, {Karla M.} and Ditzian, {Lauren R.} and Mauricio Maza and Scarinci, {Isabel C.} and Felix, {Juan C.} and Castle, {Philip E.} and Sofia Villalta and Esmeralda Miranda and Cremer, {Miriam L.}",
year = "2014",
doi = "10.1016/j.ijgo.2014.02.026",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "126",
pages = "156--160",
journal = "International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics",
issn = "0020-7292",
publisher = "Elsevier Ireland Ltd",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Acceptability of self-collected versus provider-collected sampling for HPV DNA testing among women in rural El Salvador

AU - Rosenbaum, Alan J.

AU - Gage, Julia C.

AU - Alfaro, Karla M.

AU - Ditzian, Lauren R.

AU - Maza, Mauricio

AU - Scarinci, Isabel C.

AU - Felix, Juan C.

AU - Castle, Philip E.

AU - Villalta, Sofia

AU - Miranda, Esmeralda

AU - Cremer, Miriam L.

PY - 2014

Y1 - 2014

N2 - Objective To determine the acceptability of self-collected versus provider-collected sampling among women participating in public sector HPV-based cervical cancer screening in El Salvador. Methods Two thousand women aged 30-49 years underwent self-collected and provider-collected sampling with careHPV between October 2012 and March 2013 (Qiagen, Gaithersburg, MD, USA). After sample collection, a random sample of women (n = 518) were asked about their experience. Participants were questioned regarding sampling method preference, previous cervical cancer screening, HPV and cervical cancer knowledge, HPV risk factors, and demographic information. Results All 518 women approached to participate in this questionnaire study agreed and were enrolled, 27.8% (142 of 511 responding) of whom had not received cervical cancer screening within the past 3 years and were considered under-screened. Overall, 38.8% (n = 201) preferred self-collection and 31.9% (n = 165) preferred provider collection. Self-collection preference was associated with prior tubal ligation, HPV knowledge, future self-sampling preference, and future home-screening preference (P < 0.05). Reasons for self-collection preference included privacy/embarrassment, ease, and less pain; reasons cited for provider-collection preference were result accuracy and provider knowledge/experience. Conclusion Self-sampling was found to be acceptable, therefore screening programs could consider offering this option either in the clinic or at home. Self-sampling at home may increase coverage in low-resource countries and reduce the burden that screening places upon clinical infrastructure.

AB - Objective To determine the acceptability of self-collected versus provider-collected sampling among women participating in public sector HPV-based cervical cancer screening in El Salvador. Methods Two thousand women aged 30-49 years underwent self-collected and provider-collected sampling with careHPV between October 2012 and March 2013 (Qiagen, Gaithersburg, MD, USA). After sample collection, a random sample of women (n = 518) were asked about their experience. Participants were questioned regarding sampling method preference, previous cervical cancer screening, HPV and cervical cancer knowledge, HPV risk factors, and demographic information. Results All 518 women approached to participate in this questionnaire study agreed and were enrolled, 27.8% (142 of 511 responding) of whom had not received cervical cancer screening within the past 3 years and were considered under-screened. Overall, 38.8% (n = 201) preferred self-collection and 31.9% (n = 165) preferred provider collection. Self-collection preference was associated with prior tubal ligation, HPV knowledge, future self-sampling preference, and future home-screening preference (P < 0.05). Reasons for self-collection preference included privacy/embarrassment, ease, and less pain; reasons cited for provider-collection preference were result accuracy and provider knowledge/experience. Conclusion Self-sampling was found to be acceptable, therefore screening programs could consider offering this option either in the clinic or at home. Self-sampling at home may increase coverage in low-resource countries and reduce the burden that screening places upon clinical infrastructure.

KW - Acceptability

KW - Cervical cancer

KW - HPV

KW - Latin America

KW - Self-sampling

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84903698088&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84903698088&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.ijgo.2014.02.026

DO - 10.1016/j.ijgo.2014.02.026

M3 - Article

C2 - 24880188

AN - SCOPUS:84903698088

VL - 126

SP - 156

EP - 160

JO - International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics

JF - International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics

SN - 0020-7292

IS - 2

ER -