Eva Gezels, Sara Willems, Katrien Vanthomme, Lien Keersse, Kaatje Van Roy
{"title":"General Practitioners' Needs and Preferences Regarding the Provision of Self-sampling Tests for Cervical Cancer Screening in Flanders, Belgium.","authors":"Eva Gezels, Sara Willems, Katrien Vanthomme, Lien Keersse, Kaatje Van Roy","doi":"10.1177/21501319251320178","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Screening coverage for cervical cancer remains suboptimal in Flanders, Belgium. The upcoming transition to primary HPV screening in January 2025 presents an opportunity to offer self-sampling kits (SSKs) as an alternative to conventional Pap smears, with the potential to increase participation rates. General practitioners (GPs) can play a crucial role in reaching under-screened populations. Hereto it is essential to understand the needs and preferences of GPs regarding the integration of SSKs into their routine practice.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Semi-structured interviews were conducted with GPs participating in an implementation study on the added value of SSKs for long-term non-screened women, focusing on their experiences, challenges, and suggestions regarding the provision of SSKs to these patients.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The interviewed GPs recognized the potential of SSKs to increase participation, particularly due to their less invasive nature, which makes them more acceptable to underscreened women. Time constraints, technical software challenges, limited knowledge and doubt about SSK accuracy were identified as key barriers to implement SSKs in routine practice. GPs emphasized the need for adaptability in the distribution methods of SSKs, with many preferring a combination of mailing the SSKs and providing them in person. Personalized communication and tailored explanations were considered as crucial to ensure patient acceptance and the correct use of the tests.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study shows that while GPs recognize the potential of SSKs to enhance cervical cancer screening, several challenges need to be addressed for their effective integration into primary care. A successful approach should incorporate streamlined support systems, tailored approaches to implement reminders for GPs and improved education for GPs. Future research should consider quantitative data on the effectiveness and cost-efficiency of SSKs in the specific context of Flanders and the perspectives of a broader range of stakeholders, including patients, practice nurses, gynecologists and policymakers, to develop more comprehensive strategies for the successful implementation of SSKs.</p>","PeriodicalId":46723,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Primary Care and Community Health","volume":"16 ","pages":"21501319251320178"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11938895/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Primary Care and Community Health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/21501319251320178","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/3/25 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PRIMARY HEALTH CARE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Screening coverage for cervical cancer remains suboptimal in Flanders, Belgium. The upcoming transition to primary HPV screening in January 2025 presents an opportunity to offer self-sampling kits (SSKs) as an alternative to conventional Pap smears, with the potential to increase participation rates. General practitioners (GPs) can play a crucial role in reaching under-screened populations. Hereto it is essential to understand the needs and preferences of GPs regarding the integration of SSKs into their routine practice.
Methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with GPs participating in an implementation study on the added value of SSKs for long-term non-screened women, focusing on their experiences, challenges, and suggestions regarding the provision of SSKs to these patients.
Results: The interviewed GPs recognized the potential of SSKs to increase participation, particularly due to their less invasive nature, which makes them more acceptable to underscreened women. Time constraints, technical software challenges, limited knowledge and doubt about SSK accuracy were identified as key barriers to implement SSKs in routine practice. GPs emphasized the need for adaptability in the distribution methods of SSKs, with many preferring a combination of mailing the SSKs and providing them in person. Personalized communication and tailored explanations were considered as crucial to ensure patient acceptance and the correct use of the tests.
Conclusion: This study shows that while GPs recognize the potential of SSKs to enhance cervical cancer screening, several challenges need to be addressed for their effective integration into primary care. A successful approach should incorporate streamlined support systems, tailored approaches to implement reminders for GPs and improved education for GPs. Future research should consider quantitative data on the effectiveness and cost-efficiency of SSKs in the specific context of Flanders and the perspectives of a broader range of stakeholders, including patients, practice nurses, gynecologists and policymakers, to develop more comprehensive strategies for the successful implementation of SSKs.