Self-collected human papillomavirus testing acceptability: Comparison of two self-sampling modalities

Sarah Igidbashian, Sara Boveri, Noemi Spolti, Davide Radice, Maria Teresa Sandri, Mario Sideri

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Background: Human papillomavirus (HPV) testing can be used as a primary test for cervical cancer screening. HPV self-sampling has the potential to replace physician/nurse sampling. Our objective was to compare the acceptability of two self-sampling methods among 205 women undergoing an excisional procedure for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) at the European Institute of Oncology (IEO). Methods: One hundred eleven patients were given a Hybrid Capture (HC) Cervical Sampler™ (Qiagen, Hilden, Germany), and 94 received a self-lavaging device, the Delphi® Screener (Delphi Bioscience, Scherpenzeel, The Netherlands), both with written instructions. Self-sampling was performed just before the clinician-collected cervical sample. Women responded to questions using 5-point ordinal scales on the general acceptability of self-sampling and the physical comfort, embarrassment, pain, and difficulty experienced. Participants were also asked whether they prefer self-sampling or clinician sampling. Results: Both self-sampling methods were generally accepted with a significantly high score (p=0.005) and significantly lower embarrassment (p=0.042) in favor of the Delphi Screener. Both self-sampling methods were physically well accepted, not painful, and easy to perform. Most women (n=117, 68%) preferred the self-sampled compared to the clinician-sampled test, with a significantly higher proportion in the Delphi Screener group (n=59, 77.6%) compared to those using the HC Sampler (n=58, 60.4%) (p=0.021). Conclusions: The present study shows that self-sampling for HPV testing is favorably received by women. A sampling device specifically developed for self-sampling, such as the Delphi Screener, shows the highest degree of satisfaction. A well-accepted HPV sampling method could be especially useful for women who do not take part in cervical screening or in settings where organized screening is not fully implemented.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)397-402
Number of pages6
JournalJournal of Women's Health
Volume20
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Mar 1 2011

    Fingerprint

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)

Cite this