TY - JOUR
T1 - HPV self-collection
T2 - what are we waiting for? Exploration of attitudes from frontline healthcare providers
AU - Bohn, Jacqueline A.
AU - Fitch, Katherine C.
AU - Currier, Jessica J.
AU - Bruegl, Amanda
N1 - Funding Information:
AB is funded through an NCI K08 award. Support for this research was provided in part by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.
Publisher Copyright:
© IGCS and ESGO 2022. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
PY - 2022/11/9
Y1 - 2022/11/9
N2 - Objective Polymerase chain reaction based human papilloma virus (HPV) self-collection for cervical cancer screening is well established. It is utilized worldwide, accepted by patients, is cost-effective, has comparable sensitivity to provider-collected samples, and increases screening rates, however clinical practice in the United States has not shifted to include HPV self-collection. This study sought to examine provider knowledge and attitudes to better understand why HPV self-collection is not being utilized. Methods An observational, qualitative study was conducted. Data were collected with semi-structured focus groups and individual interviews with Oregon healthcare providers. Focus groups and interviews were continued until data saturation was achieved. A grounded theory method was used for analysis, a cyclical process of coding data, memo-writing, and theoretical sampling to the point of saturation. Results Eighteen healthcare providers participated in the focus group and interviews. They represented 14 of 36 counties across Oregon and 50% were physicians, 33% were nurse practitioners, and 94% worked within family medicine. All providers performed cervical cancer screening according to current American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology guidelines. Five overarching themes emerged: provider concerns, clinical and provider barriers, patient perspective and barriers, process-based themes, and barriers to cervical cancer screening. Nearly all providers stated they will offer HPV self-collection to most of their patients once available. Conclusion While providers identified concerns and barriers for initiating HPV self-collection, there was a strong desire to implement HPV self-collection and acceptance within patient populations was assumed. Providers indicated the need for HPV self-collection to be incorporated into national screening guidelines along with best practices on how to successfully implement this modality to further increase cervical cancer screening rates.
AB - Objective Polymerase chain reaction based human papilloma virus (HPV) self-collection for cervical cancer screening is well established. It is utilized worldwide, accepted by patients, is cost-effective, has comparable sensitivity to provider-collected samples, and increases screening rates, however clinical practice in the United States has not shifted to include HPV self-collection. This study sought to examine provider knowledge and attitudes to better understand why HPV self-collection is not being utilized. Methods An observational, qualitative study was conducted. Data were collected with semi-structured focus groups and individual interviews with Oregon healthcare providers. Focus groups and interviews were continued until data saturation was achieved. A grounded theory method was used for analysis, a cyclical process of coding data, memo-writing, and theoretical sampling to the point of saturation. Results Eighteen healthcare providers participated in the focus group and interviews. They represented 14 of 36 counties across Oregon and 50% were physicians, 33% were nurse practitioners, and 94% worked within family medicine. All providers performed cervical cancer screening according to current American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology guidelines. Five overarching themes emerged: provider concerns, clinical and provider barriers, patient perspective and barriers, process-based themes, and barriers to cervical cancer screening. Nearly all providers stated they will offer HPV self-collection to most of their patients once available. Conclusion While providers identified concerns and barriers for initiating HPV self-collection, there was a strong desire to implement HPV self-collection and acceptance within patient populations was assumed. Providers indicated the need for HPV self-collection to be incorporated into national screening guidelines along with best practices on how to successfully implement this modality to further increase cervical cancer screening rates.
KW - Cervical Cancer
KW - Gynecology
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85143517688&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85143517688&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1136/ijgc-2022-003860
DO - 10.1136/ijgc-2022-003860
M3 - Article
C2 - 36351745
AN - SCOPUS:85143517688
SN - 1048-891X
VL - 32
SP - 1519
EP - 1523
JO - International Journal of Gynecological Cancer
JF - International Journal of Gynecological Cancer
IS - 12
ER -