Feasibility and Acceptability of Human Papillomavirus Based Self-sampling in Underserved Minorities in the United States: A Scoping Review.

IF 2.1 4区 医学 Q2 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Journal of Lower Genital Tract Disease Pub Date : 2025-10-01 Epub Date: 2025-08-29 DOI:10.1097/LGT.0000000000000907
Joyce Zhang, Kuang-Yi Wen, Jessica Liang, Victoria Diamond, Sandra Dayaratna
{"title":"Feasibility and Acceptability of Human Papillomavirus Based Self-sampling in Underserved Minorities in the United States: A Scoping Review.","authors":"Joyce Zhang, Kuang-Yi Wen, Jessica Liang, Victoria Diamond, Sandra Dayaratna","doi":"10.1097/LGT.0000000000000907","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The aim of the review evaluates the feasibility and acceptability of human papillomavirus (HPV) self-sampling in underscreened communities to increase cervical cancer screening rates in the United States.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Database searches were conducted on PubMed, CINAHL, MEDLINE, CENTRAL, and ClinicalTrials.gov using the following search terms: HPV or human papillomavirus viruses, self-sampling, self-swabbing, or self-collection, acceptability, feasibility, and United States. The study aims to identify factors related to the feasibility and acceptability of HPV self-sampling uptake.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Sixteen studies were included in this scoping review. Most studies reviewed associated factors, such as demographic data (age and ethnicity), and socioeconomic data (income, education level, and insurance status). There was a higher HPV self-sampling rate (75%-100%) in the 11 studies where there was an in-person component including completing self-sampling kits in-person after recruitment, scheduled appointments or education sessions compared with studies where kits were returned by mail (3%-93%). Eleven studies measured acceptability and/or feasibility, and subjects reported the self-sampling process and devices were acceptable and easy to use. Of the 11 that measured feasibility and acceptability, 3 studies noted that the majority preferred self-sampling over clinician-collected Pap tests. Six studies incorporated community health worker-led education prior to distributing self-sampling kits, and improved attitudes toward self-sampling. Two studies evaluated the incidence of abnormal results between self-sampling and clinician-collected Pap test and found no difference.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>HPV self-sampling is seen as an acceptable and feasible option for cervical cancer screening for underscreened individuals. Furthermore, patient-facing education components led by community health workers greatly influenced participants' decision to self-sample.</p>","PeriodicalId":50160,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Lower Genital Tract Disease","volume":" ","pages":"348-358"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Lower Genital Tract Disease","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/LGT.0000000000000907","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/8/29 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: The aim of the review evaluates the feasibility and acceptability of human papillomavirus (HPV) self-sampling in underscreened communities to increase cervical cancer screening rates in the United States.

Methods: Database searches were conducted on PubMed, CINAHL, MEDLINE, CENTRAL, and ClinicalTrials.gov using the following search terms: HPV or human papillomavirus viruses, self-sampling, self-swabbing, or self-collection, acceptability, feasibility, and United States. The study aims to identify factors related to the feasibility and acceptability of HPV self-sampling uptake.

Results: Sixteen studies were included in this scoping review. Most studies reviewed associated factors, such as demographic data (age and ethnicity), and socioeconomic data (income, education level, and insurance status). There was a higher HPV self-sampling rate (75%-100%) in the 11 studies where there was an in-person component including completing self-sampling kits in-person after recruitment, scheduled appointments or education sessions compared with studies where kits were returned by mail (3%-93%). Eleven studies measured acceptability and/or feasibility, and subjects reported the self-sampling process and devices were acceptable and easy to use. Of the 11 that measured feasibility and acceptability, 3 studies noted that the majority preferred self-sampling over clinician-collected Pap tests. Six studies incorporated community health worker-led education prior to distributing self-sampling kits, and improved attitudes toward self-sampling. Two studies evaluated the incidence of abnormal results between self-sampling and clinician-collected Pap test and found no difference.

Conclusions: HPV self-sampling is seen as an acceptable and feasible option for cervical cancer screening for underscreened individuals. Furthermore, patient-facing education components led by community health workers greatly influenced participants' decision to self-sample.

在美国服务不足的少数民族中,基于人乳头瘤病毒的自我抽样的可行性和可接受性:范围审查。
目的:本综述的目的是评估人类乳头瘤病毒(HPV)自采样在筛查不足的社区提高宫颈癌筛查率的可行性和可接受性。材料和方法:在PubMed、CINAHL、MEDLINE、CENTRAL和ClinicalTrials.gov上进行数据库搜索,使用以下搜索词:HPV或人乳头瘤病毒病毒、自取样、自拭子或自收集、可接受性、可行性和美国。该研究旨在确定与HPV自采样摄取的可行性和可接受性相关的因素。结果:本综述纳入了16项研究。大多数研究回顾了相关因素,如人口统计数据(年龄和种族)和社会经济数据(收入、教育水平和保险状况)。在11项研究中,与通过邮件返回试剂盒的研究(3%-93%)相比,在招聘、预约或教育课程后亲自完成自采样试剂盒的研究中,HPV自采样率(75%-100%)更高。11项研究测量了可接受性和/或可行性,受试者报告了自采样过程和设备是可接受的,易于使用。在11项测量可行性和可接受性的研究中,3项研究指出,大多数人更喜欢自我抽样,而不是临床收集的巴氏试验。六项研究在分发自我抽样工具包之前纳入了社区卫生工作者主导的教育,并改善了对自我抽样的态度。两项研究评估了自取样和临床收集的巴氏试验异常结果的发生率,并没有发现差异。结论:HPV自我抽样被认为是宫颈癌筛查中可接受和可行的选择。此外,由社区卫生工作者领导的面向患者的教育内容极大地影响了参与者的自我抽样决定。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Lower Genital Tract Disease
Journal of Lower Genital Tract Disease OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY-
CiteScore
6.80
自引率
8.10%
发文量
158
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Lower Genital Tract Disease is the source for the latest science about benign and malignant conditions of the cervix, vagina, vulva, and anus. The Journal publishes peer-reviewed original research original research that addresses prevalence, causes, mechanisms, diagnosis, course, treatment, and prevention of lower genital tract disease. We publish clinical guidelines, position papers, cost-effectiveness analyses, narrative reviews, and systematic reviews, including meta-analyses. We also publish papers about research and reporting methods, opinions about controversial medical issues. Of particular note, we encourage material in any of the above mentioned categories that is related to improving patient care, avoiding medical errors, and comparative effectiveness research. We encourage publication of evidence-based guidelines, diagnostic and therapeutic algorithms, and decision aids. Original research and reviews may be sub-classified according to topic: cervix and HPV, vulva and vagina, perianal and anal, basic science, and education and learning. The scope and readership of the journal extend to several disciplines: gynecology, internal medicine, family practice, dermatology, physical therapy, pathology, sociology, psychology, anthropology, sex therapy, and pharmacology. The Journal of Lower Genital Tract Disease highlights needs for future research, and enhances health care. The Journal of Lower Genital Tract Disease is the official journal of the American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology, the International Society for the Study of Vulvovaginal Disease, and the International Federation of Cervical Pathology and Colposcopy, and sponsored by the Australian Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology and the Society of Canadian Colposcopists.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信