Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2014 Aug;126(2):156-60. doi: 10.1016/j.ijgo.2014.02.026. Epub 2014 May 2.

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

Author information

1
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, USA; Fulbright US Student Program, US Department of State, WA, USA.
2
Department of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, USA.
3
Basic Health International, San Salvador, El Salvador.
4
University of AL at Birmingham, Birmingham, USA.
5
Department of Pathology, University of Southern CA, Los Angeles, USA.
6
Global Cancer Institute, Chestertown, USA.
7
Ministry of Health of El Salvador, San Salvador, El Salvador.
8
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, USA; Basic Health International, San Salvador, El Salvador. Electronic address: cremerm@mail.magee.edu.

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

PMID:
24880188
DOI:
10.1016/j.ijgo.2014.02.026
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Wiley
Loading ...
Support Center