Cargando…

Vaginal self-sampling is a cost-effective way to increase participation in a cervical cancer screening programme: a randomised trial

BACKGROUND: Cervical cancer screening coverage remains insufficient in most countries. Our objective was to assess whether in-home vaginal self-sampling with a dry swab for high-risk human papillomavirus (HR-HPV) testing is effective and cost-effective in increasing participation in cervical cancer...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Haguenoer, K, Sengchanh, S, Gaudy-Graffin, C, Boyard, J, Fontenay, R, Marret, H, Goudeau, A, Pigneaux de Laroche, N, Rusch, E, Giraudeau, B
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Nature Publishing Group 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4260034/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25247320
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/bjc.2014.510
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: Cervical cancer screening coverage remains insufficient in most countries. Our objective was to assess whether in-home vaginal self-sampling with a dry swab for high-risk human papillomavirus (HR-HPV) testing is effective and cost-effective in increasing participation in cervical cancer screening. METHODS: In March 2012, 6000 unscreened women aged 30–65 years, living in a French region covered by a screening programme, who had not responded to an initial invitation to have a Pap smear were equally randomised to three groups: ‘no intervention' ‘recall', women received a letter to have a Pap smear; and ‘self-sampling', women received a self-sampling kit to return to a centralised virology laboratory for PCR-based HPV testing. RESULTS: Participation was higher in the ‘self-sampling' than in the ‘no intervention' group (22.5% vs 9.9%, P<0.0001; OR 2.64) and ‘recall' group (11.7%, P<0.0001; OR 2.20). In the ‘self-sampling' group, 320 used the self-sampling kit; for 44 of these women with positive HR-HPV test results, 40 had the recommended triage Pap smear. The ICER per extra screened woman was 77.8€ and 63.2€ for the ‘recall' and ‘self-sampling' groups, respectively, relative to the ‘no intervention' group. CONCLUSIONS: Offering an in-home, return-mail kit for vaginal self-sampling with a dry swab is more effective and cost-effective than a recall letter in increasing participation in cervical cancer screening.