Cargando…

Self-sampling in cervical cancer screening: comparison of a brush-based and a lavage-based cervicovaginal self-sampling device

BACKGROUND: High coverage and attendance is essential for cervical cancer screening success. We investigated whether the previous positive experiences on increasing screening attendance by self-sampling in Finland are sampler device dependent. METHODS: All women identified to cervical cancer screeni...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Karjalainen, Liisa, Anttila, Ahti, Nieminen, Pekka, Luostarinen, Tapio, Virtanen, Anni
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4791879/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26979237
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12885-016-2246-9
_version_ 1782421154560999424
author Karjalainen, Liisa
Anttila, Ahti
Nieminen, Pekka
Luostarinen, Tapio
Virtanen, Anni
author_facet Karjalainen, Liisa
Anttila, Ahti
Nieminen, Pekka
Luostarinen, Tapio
Virtanen, Anni
author_sort Karjalainen, Liisa
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: High coverage and attendance is essential for cervical cancer screening success. We investigated whether the previous positive experiences on increasing screening attendance by self-sampling in Finland are sampler device dependent. METHODS: All women identified to cervical cancer screening in 2013 in 28 Finnish municipalities were randomised to receive a lavage- (n = 6030) or a brush type of self-sampling device (n = 6045) in case of non-attendance after two invitation letters. Seven hundred seventy non-attending women in the lavage device group and 734 in the brush group received the self-sampling offer. Women’s experiences were enquired with an enclosed questionnaire. RESULTS: Total attendance in the lavage group increased from 71.0 to 77.7 % by reminder letters and further to 80.5 % by self-sampling. Respective increase in the brush group was from 72.2 to 78.6 % and then to 81.5 %. The participation by self-sampling was 21.7 % (95 % CI 18.8–24.6) in the lavage group and 23.8 % (95 % CI 20.8–26.9) in the brush group. Women’s self-sampling experiences were mainly positive and the sampler devices were equally well accepted by the women. CONCLUSION: Our study shows that the lavage device and brush device perform similarly in terms of uptake by non-attending women and user comfort. If self-sampling is integrated to the routine screening program in Finland, either of the devices can be chosen without the fear of losing participants due to a less acceptable device.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4791879
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-47918792016-03-16 Self-sampling in cervical cancer screening: comparison of a brush-based and a lavage-based cervicovaginal self-sampling device Karjalainen, Liisa Anttila, Ahti Nieminen, Pekka Luostarinen, Tapio Virtanen, Anni BMC Cancer Research Article BACKGROUND: High coverage and attendance is essential for cervical cancer screening success. We investigated whether the previous positive experiences on increasing screening attendance by self-sampling in Finland are sampler device dependent. METHODS: All women identified to cervical cancer screening in 2013 in 28 Finnish municipalities were randomised to receive a lavage- (n = 6030) or a brush type of self-sampling device (n = 6045) in case of non-attendance after two invitation letters. Seven hundred seventy non-attending women in the lavage device group and 734 in the brush group received the self-sampling offer. Women’s experiences were enquired with an enclosed questionnaire. RESULTS: Total attendance in the lavage group increased from 71.0 to 77.7 % by reminder letters and further to 80.5 % by self-sampling. Respective increase in the brush group was from 72.2 to 78.6 % and then to 81.5 %. The participation by self-sampling was 21.7 % (95 % CI 18.8–24.6) in the lavage group and 23.8 % (95 % CI 20.8–26.9) in the brush group. Women’s self-sampling experiences were mainly positive and the sampler devices were equally well accepted by the women. CONCLUSION: Our study shows that the lavage device and brush device perform similarly in terms of uptake by non-attending women and user comfort. If self-sampling is integrated to the routine screening program in Finland, either of the devices can be chosen without the fear of losing participants due to a less acceptable device. BioMed Central 2016-03-15 /pmc/articles/PMC4791879/ /pubmed/26979237 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12885-016-2246-9 Text en © Karjalainen et al. 2016 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Karjalainen, Liisa
Anttila, Ahti
Nieminen, Pekka
Luostarinen, Tapio
Virtanen, Anni
Self-sampling in cervical cancer screening: comparison of a brush-based and a lavage-based cervicovaginal self-sampling device
title Self-sampling in cervical cancer screening: comparison of a brush-based and a lavage-based cervicovaginal self-sampling device
title_full Self-sampling in cervical cancer screening: comparison of a brush-based and a lavage-based cervicovaginal self-sampling device
title_fullStr Self-sampling in cervical cancer screening: comparison of a brush-based and a lavage-based cervicovaginal self-sampling device
title_full_unstemmed Self-sampling in cervical cancer screening: comparison of a brush-based and a lavage-based cervicovaginal self-sampling device
title_short Self-sampling in cervical cancer screening: comparison of a brush-based and a lavage-based cervicovaginal self-sampling device
title_sort self-sampling in cervical cancer screening: comparison of a brush-based and a lavage-based cervicovaginal self-sampling device
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4791879/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26979237
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12885-016-2246-9
work_keys_str_mv AT karjalainenliisa selfsamplingincervicalcancerscreeningcomparisonofabrushbasedandalavagebasedcervicovaginalselfsamplingdevice
AT anttilaahti selfsamplingincervicalcancerscreeningcomparisonofabrushbasedandalavagebasedcervicovaginalselfsamplingdevice
AT nieminenpekka selfsamplingincervicalcancerscreeningcomparisonofabrushbasedandalavagebasedcervicovaginalselfsamplingdevice
AT luostarinentapio selfsamplingincervicalcancerscreeningcomparisonofabrushbasedandalavagebasedcervicovaginalselfsamplingdevice
AT virtanenanni selfsamplingincervicalcancerscreeningcomparisonofabrushbasedandalavagebasedcervicovaginalselfsamplingdevice