The effect of video information on anxiety levels in women attending colposcopy: a randomized controlled trial

Contains fulltext : 182397.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)OBJECTIVE: The aim was to investigate whether additional information, in video form, reduces anxiety, depression and pain levels in women referred for colposcopy. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Between September 2012 and March 2015, 136 patients referred for colposcopy were randomized into two study arms. Group A received video information in addition to the regular information leaflet, and group B (control group) received only the regular information leaflet. The patients were requested to complete standardized online questionnaires. The first online questionnaire (T1) was pre-randomization, and was completed at home, 5 days prior to the appointment. The second online questionnaire (T2) was completed directly before the colposcopy appointment, and the last online questionnaire (T3) was completed directly following colposcopy at the out-patient clinic. The questionnaires included the Spielberger State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI), the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), and the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) to assess pain. RESULTS: The STAI state anxiety score was high (44.6), but there was no significant difference in STAI, HADS and NRS between the two groups at the three measuring points. A post hoc analysis showed that women with a generally higher baseline anxiety trait had significantly lower HADS anxiety levels following video information. CONCLUSIONS: Additional information (video) before colposcopy did not significantly reduce anxiety, depression, and expected or experienced pain, as measured by the STAI, HADS and NRS in patients attending their first colposcopy appointment. However, most patients positively appreciated the video information, which may reduce the anxiety of extremely anxious patients

Reasons for non-attendance to cervical screening and preferences for HPV self-sampling in Dutch women

Contains fulltext : 136660.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access)OBJECTIVES: High attendance rates in cervical screening are essential for effective cancer prevention. Offering HPV self-sampling to non-responders increases participation rates. The objectives of this study were to determine why non-responders do not attend regular screening, and why they do or do not participate when offered a self-sampling device. METHODS: A questionnaire study was conducted in the Netherlands from October 2011 to December 2012. A total of 35,477 non-responders were invited to participate in an HPV self-sampling study; 5347 women did opt out. Finally, 30,130 women received a questionnaire and self-sampling device. RESULTS: The analysis was based on 9484 returned questionnaires (31.5%) with a self-sample specimen, and 682 (2.3%) without. Among women who returned both, the main reason for non-attendance to cervical screening was that they forgot to schedule an appointment (3068; 32.3%). The most important reason to use the self-sampling device was the opportunity to take a sample in their own time-setting (4763; 50.2%). A total of 30.9% of the women who did not use the self-sampling device preferred after all to have a cervical smear taken instead. CONCLUSIONS: Organisational barriers are the main reason for non-attendance in regular cervical screening. Important reasons for non-responders to the regular screening to use a self-sampling device are convenience and self-control

Screening for persistent high-risk HPV infections may be a valuable screening method for young women; A retrospective cohort study

Contains fulltext : 197712.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access

High-risk human papillomavirus detection in self-sampling compared to physician-taken smear in a responder population of the Dutch cervical screening: Results of the VERA study

In 2017 the cervical cancer screening program in The Netherlands will be revised. Cervical smears will primarily be tested for the presence of high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) instead of cytology, and vaginal self-sampling will be offered to non-responders. This includes a potential risk that part of the women who would otherwise opt for a cervical smear will wait for self-sampling. However, self-sampling for hrHPV in a responder population has never been studied yet. The aim of this study was to investigate the applicability and accuracy of self-sampling in detecting hrHPV in a screening responder population. A total of 2049 women, aged 30-60years, participating in the screening program in The Netherlands were included from April 2013 to May 2015. After they had their cervical smear taken, women self-collected a cervicovaginal sample with a brush-based device, the Evalyn Brush. Both the cervical smear and self-sample specimen were tested with the COBAS 4800 HPV platform. The hrHPV prevalence was 8.0% (95% CI 6.9-9.2) among the physician-taken samples, and 10.0% (95% CI 8.7-11.3) among the self-samples. There was 96.8% (95% CI 96.0-97.5) concordance of hrHPV prevalence between self-samples and physician-taken samples. Women in our study evaluated self-sampling as convenient (97.1%), user-friendly (98.5%), and 62.8% preferred self-sampling over a physician-taken sampling for the next screening round. In conclusion, self-sampling showed high concordance with physician-taken sampling for hrHPV detection in a responder screening population and highly acceptable to women. Implementation of HPV-self-sampling for the responder population as a primary screening tool may be considered