Factors influencing healthcare practitioners' decision to offer (or not) the choice of self-collection cervical screening in general practice in Victoria, Australia.
Nicola S Creagh, Julia ML Brotherton, Jane S Hocking, Amalia Karahalios, Marion Saville, Megan A Smith, Karen Canfell, David Hawkes, Claire Nightingale
{"title":"Factors influencing healthcare practitioners' decision to offer (or not) the choice of self-collection cervical screening in general practice in Victoria, Australia.","authors":"Nicola S Creagh, Julia ML Brotherton, Jane S Hocking, Amalia Karahalios, Marion Saville, Megan A Smith, Karen Canfell, David Hawkes, Claire Nightingale","doi":"10.31128/AJGP-04-24-7229","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objectives: </strong>In July 2022, a policy change was enacted in the National Cervical Screening Program (NCSP) to allow all women and people with a cervix (hereafter people) the choice of a self-collected sample. This study aimed to understand healthcare practitioners' decisions, and factors related to, the provision (or not) of this change.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Semi-structured interviews (n=28) were conducted between February and July 2023 with general practitioners, nurses and practice managers. The COM-B model of behaviour change framework informed the analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Although most (n=22) interviewees reported that they, or healthcare practitioners at their practice, were providing a choice of self-collection to all, a minority (n=6) reported that either they (n=4) or their practice (n=2) were not. Factors that informed the selective provision of self-collection are reported.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>For self-collection to facilitate improved equity in the NCSP, strategies are needed to reassure healthcare practitioners that self-collection is an appropriate screening modality, and ensure people are aware of their screening choices.</p>","PeriodicalId":54241,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of General Practice","volume":"54 7","pages":"477-483"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian Journal of General Practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31128/AJGP-04-24-7229","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background and objectives: In July 2022, a policy change was enacted in the National Cervical Screening Program (NCSP) to allow all women and people with a cervix (hereafter people) the choice of a self-collected sample. This study aimed to understand healthcare practitioners' decisions, and factors related to, the provision (or not) of this change.
Method: Semi-structured interviews (n=28) were conducted between February and July 2023 with general practitioners, nurses and practice managers. The COM-B model of behaviour change framework informed the analysis.
Results: Although most (n=22) interviewees reported that they, or healthcare practitioners at their practice, were providing a choice of self-collection to all, a minority (n=6) reported that either they (n=4) or their practice (n=2) were not. Factors that informed the selective provision of self-collection are reported.
Discussion: For self-collection to facilitate improved equity in the NCSP, strategies are needed to reassure healthcare practitioners that self-collection is an appropriate screening modality, and ensure people are aware of their screening choices.
期刊介绍:
The Australian Journal of General Practice (AJGP) aims to provide relevant, evidence-based, clearly articulated information to Australian general practitioners (GPs) to assist them in providing the highest quality patient care, applicable to the varied geographic and social contexts in which GPs work and to all GP roles as clinician, researcher, educator, practice team member and opinion leader. All articles are subject to peer review before they are accepted for publication.