Patient perspectives on cervical cancer screening interventions among underscreened women

Background Cervical cancer is highly preventable with regular screening, yet over 4,000 women die from it annually in the United States. Over half of new cervical cancer cases in the U.S. are attributable to insufficient screening. Methods Participants were 23 low-income, uninsured or Medicaid-insured women in North Carolina who were overdue for cervical cancer screening according to national guidelines. Semi-structured interviews examined perspectives on barriers to cervical cancer screening and on interventions to reduce these barriers. We also elicited feedback on three proposed evidence-based interventions: one-on-one education, coupons to reduce out-of-pocket costs, and self-collection of samples for detection of high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) infection, the primary cause of cervical cancer. Results Reported barriers included high cost, inconvenient clinic hours, lack of provider recommendation, poor transportation, difficulty finding a provider, fear of pain, and low perceived need. Participants suggested interventions including reducing cost, improving convenience through community-based screening or extended clinic hours, strengthening provider recommendations, and providing one-on-one counseling and education outreach. HPV self-collection was most frequently selected as the “most helpful” of 3 proposed interventions (n = 11), followed by reducing out-of-pocket costs (n = 7) and one-on-one education (n = 5). Conclusion Cost was the most reported barrier to cervical cancer screening, although women experience multiple simultaneous barriers. Novel interventions such as HPV self-collection promise to reduce some, but not all, barriers to primary screening. Interventions that work on reducing multiple barriers, including obstacles to receiving follow-up care, may be most effective to prevent cervical cancer among these high-risk women

Early adoption of the human papillomavirus vaccine among hispanic adolescent males in the united states

BACKGROUND: Human papillomavirus (HPV) infection is common among Hispanic males, but to the authors' knowledge little is known regarding HPV vaccination in this population. The authors examined the early adoption of the HPV vaccine among a national sample of Hispanic adolescent males.METHODS: The authors analyzed provider-verified HPV vaccination data from the 2010 through 2012 National Immunization Survey-Teen (NIS-Teen) for Hispanic males aged 13 years to 17 years (n=4238).Weighted logistic regression identified correlates of HPV vaccine initiation (receipt of ≥1 doses).RESULTS: HPV vaccine initiation was 17.1% overall, increasing from 2.8% in 2010 to 31.7% in 2012 (P<.0001). Initiation was higher among sons whose parents had received a provider recommendation to vaccinate compared with those whose parents had not (53.3% vs 9.0%; odds ratio, 8.77 [95% confidence interval, 6.05-12.70]). Initiation was also higher among sons who had visited a health care provider within the previous year (odds ratio, 2.42; 95% confidence interval, 1.39-4.23). Among parents with unvaccinated sons, Spanish-speaking parents reported much higher intent to vaccinate compared with English-speaking parents (means: 3.52 vs 2.54; P<.0001). Spanish-speaking parents were more likely to indicate lack of knowledge (32.9% vs 19.9%) and not having received a provider recommendation (32.2% vs 17.7%) as the main reasons for not intending to vaccinate (both P<.05).CONCLUSIONS: HPV vaccination among Hispanic adolescent males has increased substantially in recent years. Ensuring health care visits and provider recommendation will be key for continuing this trend. Preferred language may also be important for increasing HPV vaccination and addressing potential barriers to vaccination

Impact of human papillomavirus (HPV) self-collection on subsequent cervical cancer screening completion among under-screened US women: MyBodyMyTest-3 protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background: Screening substantially reduces cervical cancer incidence and mortality. More than half of invasive cervical cancers are attributable to infrequent screening or not screening at all. The current study, My Body My Test (MBMT), evaluates the impact of mailed kits for self-collection of samples for human papillomavirus (HPV) testing on completion of cervical cancer screening in low-income, North Carolina women overdue for cervical cancer screening. Methods/design: The study will enroll at least 510 US women aged 25-64 years who report no Pap test in the last 4 years and no HPV test in the last 6 years. We will randomize participants to an intervention or control arm. The intervention arm will receive kits to self-collect a sample at home and mail it for HPV testing. In both the intervention and control arms, participants will receive assistance in scheduling an appointment for screening in clinic. Study staff will deliver HPV self-collection results by phone and assist in scheduling participants for screening in clinic. The primary outcome is completion of cervical cancer screening. Specifically, completion of screening will be defined as screening in clinic or receipt of negative HPV self-collection results. Women with HPV-negative self-collection results will be considered screening-complete. All other participants will be considered screening-complete if they obtain co-testing or Pap test screening at a study-affiliated institution or other clinic. We will assess whether the self-collection intervention influences participants' perceived risk of cervical cancer and whether perceived risk mediates the relationship between HPV self-collection results and subsequent screening in clinic. We also will estimate the incremental cost per woman screened of offering at-home HPV self-collection kits with scheduling assistance as compared to offering scheduling assistance alone. Discussion: If mailed self-collection of samples for HPV testing is an effective strategy for increasing cervical cancer screening among women overdue for screening, this method has the potential to reduce cervical cancer incidence and mortality in medically underserved women at higher risk of developing cervical cancer. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02651883, Registered on 11 January 2016

Overcoming barriers to adolescent vaccination: perspectives from vaccine providers in North Carolina

To capture strategies for achieving high adolescent coverage of tetanus-diphtheria-acellular pertussis (Tdap), meningococcal conjugate (MenACWY), and human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination, we surveyed employees of 20 North Carolina (N.C.) clinics that achieved adolescent vaccination coverage higher than the state average. One employee per clinic completed a surveysummarizing clinic practices regarding adolescent vaccination; perceived barriers and facilitators to Tdap/MenACWY/HPV vaccination; and the role of “champions” who made special efforts to promote adolescent vaccination. Common perceived barriers for all vaccinations were parental opposition and logistical barriers to receiving vaccination. For HPV vaccination, employees cited parental concerns about sexual behavior and injection site pain; no school vaccination requirement; and low-perceived benefit in boys. Most clinics (80%) implemented successful changes to increase adolescent vaccination: consistently offering vaccination, tracking vaccination status using existing data, providing appointment reminders, updating providers on vaccination recommendations, and expanding vaccination hours. Strategies to improve HPV vaccination included co-administration with Tdap and MenACWY, and providing reminders to complete the vaccination series. Vaccine champions strongly recommended vaccination to parents (55%) and educated parents on vaccination recommendations (36%). Clinics in N.C.and similar settings can implement these and other low-resource strategies to overcome adolescent vaccination barriers. Abbreviations: CDC=Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; EHR=Electronic health record; HPV=Human papillomavirus; Tdap=Tetanus-diphtheria-acellular pertussis vaccine; MenACWY=Meningococcal Conjugate Vaccine; NCIB=North Carolina Immunization Branch; NCIR=North Carolina Immunization Registry; ACIP=Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices

Reducing overuse of cervical cancer screening: A systematic review

Overuse of clinical preventive services increases healthcare costs and may deprive underserved patients of necessary care. Up to 45% of cervical cancer screening is overuse. We conducted a systematic review of correlates of overuse of cervical cancer screening and interventions to reduce overuse. The search identified 25 studies (20 observational; 5 intervention). Correlates varied by the type of overuse measured (i.e., too frequent, before/after recommended age to start or stop screening, after hysterectomy), the most common correlates of overuse related to patient age (n = 7), OBGYN practice or provider (n = 5), location (n = 4), and marital status (n = 4). Six observational studies reported a decrease in overuse over time. Screening overuse decreased in all intervention studies, which used before-after designs with no control or comparison groups. Observational studies suggest potential targets for de-escalating overuse. Randomized clinical trials are needed to establish best practices for reducing overuse

Predictors of Cervical Cancer Screening among Infrequently Screened Women Completing Human Papillomavirus Self-Collection: My Body My Test-1

Background: Approximately one-half of cervical cancer cases in the United States occur in underscreened or never-screened women. We examined predictors to completing Papanicolaou (Pap) testing and whether a positive human papillomavirus (HPV) self-collection result affects Pap testing adherence among underscreened women. Materials and Methods: Low-income women aged 30-65 years who reported no Pap testing in ≥4 years were recruited in North Carolina. Knowledge, attitudes, and barriers regarding cervical cancer and Pap testing were assessed by telephone questionnaires. We mailed self-collection kits for HPV testing and provided information regarding where to obtain affordable Pap testing. Participants received $45 for completing all activities. We used multivariable logistic regression to assess the predictors of longer reported time since last Pap (≥10 vs. 4-9 years) and of completion of Pap testing following study enrollment (follow-up Pap). Results: Participants (n = 230) were primarily black (55%), uninsured (64%), and with ≤high school education (59%). Cost and finding an affordable clinic were the most commonly reported barriers to screening. White women and those with ≤high school education reported longer intervals since last Pap test. Half of the participants reported completing a follow-up Pap test (55%). Women with a positive HPV self-collection were five times more likely to report completing a follow-up Pap test than those with negative self-collection (odds ratio = 5.1, 95% confidence interval 1.4-25.7). Conclusions: Improving awareness of resources for affordable screening could increase cervical cancer screening in underserved women. Home-based HPV self-collection represents an opportunity to re-engage infrequently screened women into preventive screening services

Pharmacist insights into adolescent human papillomavirus vaccination provision in the United States

HPV vaccination coverage in the United States (US) falls short of the Healthy People 2020 goal of 80% coverage among 13–15 year-old adolescents. Pharmacies are a promising alternative vaccine delivery site that may increase access to HPV vaccination. Our objective was to assess pharmacists’ insights into HPV vaccination provision to adolescents. We recruited 40 licensed pharmacists in eight states with different pharmacy vaccination laws: Alabama, California, Indiana, Kentucky, Maine, Tennessee, Texas, and Washington. Eligible pharmacists either previously provided or were currently providing HPV, tetanus-diphtheria-pertussis, or meningococcal vaccines to adolescents aged 9–17 years. Pharmacists were administered a semi-structured survey to explore insights into HPV vaccination provision. Forty-five percent of surveyed pharmacies offered HPV vaccination to adolescents. Pharmacists’ reported challenges to providing HPV vaccination were parental consent (28%), tracking and patient recall (17%), perceived stigma of vaccination (17%), and education about or promotion of vaccination (17%). Pharmacists offering HPV vaccination sent patient reminders for vaccines with multiple doses (89%) and utilized telephone reminders (72%). Pharmacists informed patients’ primary care providers of HPV vaccination doses most commonly through fax (72%) and updating electronic medical records (22%). One-third of pharmacists reported vaccination provision using the state immunization information system (IIS). Seventy-five percent reported vaccination rates could be increased at their respective pharmacy. Pharmacies are underutilized, although highly accessible, for HPV vaccination in the US. National efforts should expand educational programs to improve public awareness of in-pharmacy HPV vaccination, and improve the utilization of state IIS for reporting immunization coverage of adolescents by pharmacists

Acceptability and ease of use of mailed HPV self-collection among infrequently screened women in North Carolina

Objectives: Self-collection of cervico-vaginal samples for human papillomavirus (HPV) testing has the potential to make cervical cancer screening more accessible to underscreened women. We evaluated the acceptability and ease of use of home-based HPV self-collection within a diverse population of low-income, infrequently screened women. Methods: Participants were low-income women from North Carolina who had not received Pap testing in 4 or more years. Eligible women received a self-collection kit containing instructions and a brush for home-based sample collection. A total of 227 women returned a self-collected sample by mail and completed a questionnaire to assess their experiences with HPV self-collection. We described acceptability measures and used logistic regression to identify predictors of overall positive thoughts about the self-collection experience. Results: Nearly all women were willing to perform HPV self-collection again (98%) and were comfortable receiving the self-collection kit in the mail (99%). Overall, 81% of participants reported positive thoughts about home-based self-collection. Women with at least some college education and those who were divorced, separated or widowed were more likely to report overall positive thoughts. Aspects of self-collection that participants most commonly reported liking included convenience (53%), ease of use (32%) and privacy (23%). The most frequently reported difficulties included uncertainty that the self-collection was done correctly (16%) and difficulty inserting the self-collection brush (16%). Conclusions: Home-based self-collection for HPV was a highly acceptable screening method among low-income, underscreened women and holds the promise to increase access to cervical cancer screening in this high-risk population

Preference for Human Papillomavirus Self-Collection and Papanicolaou: Survey of Underscreened Women in North Carolina

Objectives Self-collection of samples for human papillomavirus (HPV) testing (self-collection) has the potential to increase cervical cancer screening among underscreened women. We assessed attitudes toward at-home HPV self-collection compared with clinic-based Pap testing in this higher-risk population. Materials and Methods Participants were low-income women in North Carolina overdue for cervical cancer screening. Women self-collected samples at home, returned samples by mail for HPV testing, and completed phone questionnaires about at-home HPV self-collection. Participants were referred to clinic-based Pap testing and invited to complete a second questionnaire about Pap testing. A cross-sectional questionnaire compared attitudes, experiences, and preferences for self-collection versus Pap testing and assessed predictors of preference for HPV self-collection. Results Half (51%) of 221 women reported a preference for HPV self-collection, 19% preferred Pap testing, and 27% reported no preference. More women reported difficulty finding time to do the Pap test (31%) than the self-test (13%, p =.003) and being afraid of the self-test results (50%) than the Pap test results (36%, p =.02). There were relatively fewer reports of physical discomfort and pain from self-collection than Pap testing (discomfort: 18% self; 48% Pap; pain: 8% self; 30% Pap, p =.001). No differences were found in positive versus negative thoughts about the tests, trust in the tests' safety and accuracy, or willingness to do tests again. Conclusions Overall positive attitudes toward HPV self-collection compared with Pap testing among underscreened women suggest that self-collection is a promising option to increase cervical cancer screening in this high-risk population

Racial and ethnic differences in cervical cancer screening barriers and intentions: The My Body My Test-3 HPV self-collection trial among under-screened, low-income women

Under-screened women are more likely to be diagnosed with invasive cervical cancer at later stages and have worse survival outcomes. Under- or un-insured women, low-income women, and minoritized groups face barriers to screening. Intention to screen is an indicator of future screening behavior, yet is understudied among low-income, under-screened women. Participants were 710 low-income, uninsured or publicly insured women ages 25–64 years in North Carolina who were not up to date on cervical cancer screening according to national guidelines. Participants were asked about barriers to screening and intention to screen. We estimated reported barriers to cervical cancer screening stratified by race and ethnicity (categorized as White, Black, and Hispanic) and assessed predictors of intention to screen. Sixty-one percent of all participants reported 5 or more barriers to screening. The most commonly reported reasons for not getting screened were lack of insurance (White: 71%, Black: 62%, Hispanic/Latina: 63%) and cost (White: 55%, Black: 44%, Hispanic/ Latina: 61%). Women were more likely to have an intention to screen if they reported “it was not hard to get screening” (OR: 1.47 (1.00, 2.15)). Older women reported being less likely to intend to screen. Black women reported being more likely to intend to screen than White women. Lack of health insurance and cost were frequently reported barriers to cervical cancer screening. Increasing knowledge of affordable clinics and expanding access to Medicaid may reduce barriers and increase cervical cancer screening uptake