{"title":"津巴布韦将热消融作为宫颈癌预防性治疗方法的可接受性和可行性,以及与冷冻疗法的治疗效果比较。","authors":"Malvern Munjoma, Stephano Gudukeya, Jabulani Mavudze, Charity Chipfumbu, Hanul Choi, Tafara Moga, Blessing Mutede, Staci Leuschner, Noah Taruberekera","doi":"10.3332/ecancer.2024.1736","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction and background: </strong>Thermal ablation, a technique that destroys precancerous cervical cells by extreme heat or cold, is predominantly used as a preventive cervical cancer treatment modality in high-income countries. Compared to other treatment methods thermal ablation has numerous advantages in its portability, minimal electricity use and comparable treatment rates, which is convenient for use in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Therefore, it is important to understand acceptability among providers and clients and the feasibility of achieving comparable treatment outcomes with other methods in LMICs.</p><p><strong>Methodology: </strong>We conducted a prospective longitudinal, open-label two-arm study from June 2021 to April 2022 at seven health delivery points. In this study, 182 clients were enrolled to receive preventive cancer treatment at baseline and followed up 6 months later to measure treatment outcomes and experiences on the procedure. Eligible consented clients were elected to a preferred method (either thermal ablation as an intervention or cryotherapy as a control group). We also conducted qualitative interviews with 14 service providers in either static or outreach settings.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>At the 6-month follow-up, the efficacy was comparable among the two groups, 96.5% (95% CI 86.7%-99.1%) clients in the intervention group had successful lesion treatment rate compared to 80.8% (95% CI 69.9%-99.1%) of the control group. Furthermore, 99% of clients in the intervention group would recommend thermal ablation to their family members or peers. Service providers preferred thermal ablation due to its ease of use, lower costs, portability and lower likelihood of adverse events compared to cryotherapy.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The study showed the feasibility of implementing thermal ablation as a new preventive cervical cancer treatment modality in Zimbabwe. Furthermore, service providers indicated their preference for thermal ablation due to its ease of use, portability at static settings and lower likelihood of adverse events occurrence. Therefore, we recommend scaling up thermal ablation both at static and outreach sites.</p>","PeriodicalId":11460,"journal":{"name":"ecancermedicalscience","volume":"18 ","pages":"1736"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11485274/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Acceptability and feasibility of implementing thermal ablation as a preventive cervical cancer treatment and the comparison of treatment outcome with cryotherapy in Zimbabwe.\",\"authors\":\"Malvern Munjoma, Stephano Gudukeya, Jabulani Mavudze, Charity Chipfumbu, Hanul Choi, Tafara Moga, Blessing Mutede, Staci Leuschner, Noah Taruberekera\",\"doi\":\"10.3332/ecancer.2024.1736\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction and background: </strong>Thermal ablation, a technique that destroys precancerous cervical cells by extreme heat or cold, is predominantly used as a preventive cervical cancer treatment modality in high-income countries. Compared to other treatment methods thermal ablation has numerous advantages in its portability, minimal electricity use and comparable treatment rates, which is convenient for use in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Therefore, it is important to understand acceptability among providers and clients and the feasibility of achieving comparable treatment outcomes with other methods in LMICs.</p><p><strong>Methodology: </strong>We conducted a prospective longitudinal, open-label two-arm study from June 2021 to April 2022 at seven health delivery points. In this study, 182 clients were enrolled to receive preventive cancer treatment at baseline and followed up 6 months later to measure treatment outcomes and experiences on the procedure. Eligible consented clients were elected to a preferred method (either thermal ablation as an intervention or cryotherapy as a control group). We also conducted qualitative interviews with 14 service providers in either static or outreach settings.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>At the 6-month follow-up, the efficacy was comparable among the two groups, 96.5% (95% CI 86.7%-99.1%) clients in the intervention group had successful lesion treatment rate compared to 80.8% (95% CI 69.9%-99.1%) of the control group. Furthermore, 99% of clients in the intervention group would recommend thermal ablation to their family members or peers. Service providers preferred thermal ablation due to its ease of use, lower costs, portability and lower likelihood of adverse events compared to cryotherapy.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The study showed the feasibility of implementing thermal ablation as a new preventive cervical cancer treatment modality in Zimbabwe. Furthermore, service providers indicated their preference for thermal ablation due to its ease of use, portability at static settings and lower likelihood of adverse events occurrence. Therefore, we recommend scaling up thermal ablation both at static and outreach sites.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11460,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ecancermedicalscience\",\"volume\":\"18 \",\"pages\":\"1736\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11485274/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ecancermedicalscience\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3332/ecancer.2024.1736\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ecancermedicalscience","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3332/ecancer.2024.1736","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Acceptability and feasibility of implementing thermal ablation as a preventive cervical cancer treatment and the comparison of treatment outcome with cryotherapy in Zimbabwe.
Introduction and background: Thermal ablation, a technique that destroys precancerous cervical cells by extreme heat or cold, is predominantly used as a preventive cervical cancer treatment modality in high-income countries. Compared to other treatment methods thermal ablation has numerous advantages in its portability, minimal electricity use and comparable treatment rates, which is convenient for use in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Therefore, it is important to understand acceptability among providers and clients and the feasibility of achieving comparable treatment outcomes with other methods in LMICs.
Methodology: We conducted a prospective longitudinal, open-label two-arm study from June 2021 to April 2022 at seven health delivery points. In this study, 182 clients were enrolled to receive preventive cancer treatment at baseline and followed up 6 months later to measure treatment outcomes and experiences on the procedure. Eligible consented clients were elected to a preferred method (either thermal ablation as an intervention or cryotherapy as a control group). We also conducted qualitative interviews with 14 service providers in either static or outreach settings.
Results: At the 6-month follow-up, the efficacy was comparable among the two groups, 96.5% (95% CI 86.7%-99.1%) clients in the intervention group had successful lesion treatment rate compared to 80.8% (95% CI 69.9%-99.1%) of the control group. Furthermore, 99% of clients in the intervention group would recommend thermal ablation to their family members or peers. Service providers preferred thermal ablation due to its ease of use, lower costs, portability and lower likelihood of adverse events compared to cryotherapy.
Conclusion: The study showed the feasibility of implementing thermal ablation as a new preventive cervical cancer treatment modality in Zimbabwe. Furthermore, service providers indicated their preference for thermal ablation due to its ease of use, portability at static settings and lower likelihood of adverse events occurrence. Therefore, we recommend scaling up thermal ablation both at static and outreach sites.