SORA

Advancing, promoting and sharing knowledge of health through excellence in teaching, clinical practice and research into the prevention and treatment of illness

Patient preference and acceptability of self-sampling for cervical screening in colposcopy clinic attenders: A cross-sectional semi-structured survey

Webb, S; Mat Ali, N; Sawyer, A; Clark, DJ; Brown, MA; Augustin, Y; Woo, YL; Khoo, SP; Hargreaves, S; Staines, HM; et al. Webb, S; Mat Ali, N; Sawyer, A; Clark, DJ; Brown, MA; Augustin, Y; Woo, YL; Khoo, SP; Hargreaves, S; Staines, HM; Krishna, S; Hayes, K (2024) Patient preference and acceptability of self-sampling for cervical screening in colposcopy clinic attenders: A cross-sectional semi-structured survey. PLOS Global Public Health, 4 (5). e0003186. ISSN 2767-3375 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgph.0003186
SGUL Authors: Staines, Henry Michael

[img]
Preview
PDF Published Version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution.

Download (665kB) | Preview
[img] Microsoft Word (.docx) (S1 Questionnaire) Supplemental Material
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution.

Download (20kB)
[img] Microsoft Word (.docx) (S1 Checklist) Supplemental Material
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution.

Download (74kB)

Abstract

Low vaginal self-sampling has been pioneered as an important development to improve uptake of cervical screening globally. Limited research is available in specific patient groups in the UK exploring views around self-sampling to detect high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) DNA. Therefore, we explored patient views to support development of a novel point-of-care self-sampling cervical cancer screening device, by undertaking a cross-sectional semi-structured questionnaire survey to explore preferences, acceptability, barriers and facilitators around self-sampling. Patients attending a colposcopy clinic, 25–64 years old, were invited to participate after having carried out a low vaginal self-sample using a regular flocked swab. Participants self-completed an anonymous 12-point questionnaire. Quantitative data were analysed in MS Excel and Graphpad Prism, and qualitative data with Nvivo. We recruited 274 patients with a questionnaire response rate of 76%. Acceptability of self-sampling was high (95%, n = 187/197; Cronbachs-α = 0.778). Participants were asked their choice of future screening method: a) low vaginal self-sampling, b) healthcare professional collected vaginal swab, c) cervical brush sample with healthcare professional speculum examination, or d) no preference. Preferences were: a) 37% (n = 74/198), b) 19% (n = 37/198); c) 9% (n = 17/198), and d) 35% (n = 70/198), showing no single option as a strong preference. Key motivators were: Test simplicity (90%, n = 170/190), speed (81%, n = 153/190) and less pain (65%, n = 123/190). Barriers included lack of confidence taking the sample (53%, n = 10/19), resulting in preference for a healthcare professional sample (47%, n = 9/19). Whilst self-sampling showed high acceptability, lack of strong preference for screening method may reflect that respondents attending colposcopy are already engaged with screening and have differing perception of cervical cancer risk. This group appear less likely to ‘switch’ to self-sampling, and it may be better targeted within primary and community care, focusing on under-screened populations. Any shift in this paradigm in the UK requires comprehensive education and support for patients and providers.

Item Type: Article
Additional Information: Copyright: © 2024 Webb et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
SGUL Research Institute / Research Centre: Academic Structure > Infection and Immunity Research Institute (INII)
Academic Structure > REF 2021 user group
Journal or Publication Title: PLOS Global Public Health
Editors: Keles, E
ISSN: 2767-3375
Language: en
Dates:
DateEvent
23 May 2024Published
23 April 2024Accepted
Publisher License: Creative Commons: Attribution 4.0
Projects:
Project IDFunderFunder ID
UNSPECIFIEDSt George's Hospital CharityUNSPECIFIED
204809/Z/16/ZWellcome Trusthttp://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100004440
NIHR300072National Institute for Health and Care Researchhttp://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000272
NIHR134801National Institute for Health and Care Researchhttp://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000272
SBF005\1111Academy of Medical Scienceshttp://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000691
LCF/PR/SP21/52930003La Caixa FoundationUNSPECIFIED
UNSPECIFIEDResearch Englandhttp://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100013589
UNSPECIFIEDWorld Health Organizationhttp://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100004423
URI: https://openaccess.sgul.ac.uk/id/eprint/116518
Publisher's version: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgph.0003186

Actions (login required)

Edit Item Edit Item