Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2014 Jun 12:14:596.
doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-14-596.

Acceptability of self-collection sampling for HPV-DNA testing in low-resource settings: a mixed methods approach

Pooja Bansil  1 , Scott Wittet, Jeanette L Lim, Jennifer L Winkler, Proma Paul, Jose Jeronimo
Affiliations

Acceptability of self-collection sampling for HPV-DNA testing in low-resource settings: a mixed methods approach

Pooja Bansil et al. BMC Public Health. .

Abstract

Background: Vaginal self-sampling with HPV-DNA tests is a promising primary screening method for cervical cancer. However, women's experiences, concerns and the acceptability of such tests in low-resource settings remain unknown.

Methods: In India, Nicaragua, and Uganda, a mixed-method design was used to collect data from surveys (N = 3,863), qualitative interviews (N = 72; 20 providers and 52 women) and focus groups (N = 30 women) on women's and providers' experiences with self-sampling, women's opinions of sampling at home, and their future needs.

Results: Among surveyed women, 90% provided a self- collected sample. Of these, 75% reported it was easy, although 52% were initially concerned about hurting themselves and 24% were worried about not getting a good sample. Most surveyed women preferred self-sampling (78%). However it was not clear if they responded to the privacy of self-sampling or the convenience of avoiding a pelvic examination, or both. In follow-up interviews, most women reported that they didn't mind self-sampling, but many preferred to have a provider collect the vaginal sample. Most women also preferred clinic-based screening (as opposed to home-based self-sampling), because the sample could be collected by a provider, women could receive treatment if needed, and the clinic was sanitary and provided privacy. Self-sampling acceptability was higher when providers prepared women through education, allowed women to examine the collection brush, and were present during the self-collection process. Among survey respondents, aids that would facilitate self-sampling in the future were: staff help (53%), additional images in the illustrated instructions (31%), and a chance to practice beforehand with a doll/model (26%).

Conclusion: Self-and vaginal-sampling are widely acceptable among women in low-resource settings. Providers have a unique opportunity to educate and prepare women for self-sampling and be flexible in accommodating women's preference for self-sampling.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Percent of women who provided a self vaginal sample, by study site and all sites (N = 3464).
Figure 2
Figure 2
Women’s concerns for participating in the overall demonstration study (N = 3863).
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Ferlay J, Shin H-R, Bray F, Forman D, Mathers C, Parkin DM. Estimates of worldwide burden of cancer in 2008: GLOBOCAN 2008. Int J Cancer. 2010;127:2893–2917. doi: 10.1002/ijc.25516. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Goldie SJ, Gaffikin L, Goldhaber-Fiebert JD, Gordillo-Tobar A, Levin C, Mahé C, Wright TC. Alliance for Cervical Cancer Prevention Cost Working Group. Cost-effectiveness of cervical-cancer screening in five developing countries. N Engl J Med. 2005;353(20):2158–2168. doi: 10.1056/NEJMsa044278. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Sherris J, Wittet S, Kleine A, Sellors J, Luciani S, Sankaranarayanan R, Barone MA. Evidence-based, alternative cervical cancer screening approaches in low-resource settings. Int Perspect Sex Reprod Health. 2009;35(3):147–154. doi: 10.1363/3514709. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Cuzick J, Clavel C, Petry KU, Meijer CJ, Hoyer H, Ratnam S, Szarewski A, Birembaut P, Kulasingam S, Sasieni P, Iftner T. Overview of the European and North American studies on HPV testing in primary cervical cancer screening. Int J Cancer. 2006;119(5):1095–1101. doi: 10.1002/ijc.21955. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Mayrand MH, Duarte-Franco E, Rodrigues I, Walter SD, Hanley J, Ferenczy A, Ratnam S, Coutlée F, Franco EL. Canadian Cervical Cancer Screening Trial Study Group. Human papillomavirus DNA versus Papanicolaou screening tests for cervical cancer. N Engl J Med. 2007;357(16):1579–1588. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa071430. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types