data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/1997a/1997a51e88e10f05b9bdb4188361de94b0bf7150" alt="Hannah"
Hannah Drysdale
About
Biography
Hannah is a Research Fellow in Health Inequalities in the School of Health Sciences at the University of Surrey. She is currently working on the CancerLearn project, an NIHR funded research programme, which aims to understand inequalities in cancer diagnostic outcomes for people with learning disabilities. Hannah's other interests include researching inequalities in cervical cancer screening, with a particular focus on the planned introduction of HPV vaginal self-sampling into the NHS cervical screening programme. She also works on the DISTINCT project, a collaboration between the Institute of Cancer Research and Queen Mary University of London, which is exploring public views on collecting data to monitor inclusivity of cancer clinical trials.
My qualifications
Affiliations and memberships
Publications
Abstract
Objectives
Primary human papillomavirus (HPV) testing in cervical screening offers the opportunity for women to be given a choice between HPV self-sampling and traditional clinician screening. This study assessed attitudes towards a choice and anticipated future preference among women who had collected a vaginal self-sample alongside their usual cervical screen.
Setting
Thirty-eight general practices across five areas in England.
Methods
Overall, 2323 women (24–65 years; response rate: 48%) completed a survey after collecting a self-sample and having a clinician screen at their GP practice. We asked which test they preferred and assessed attitudes to being offered a choice. We explored age, education, ethnicity and screening experience as predictors of attitudes towards a choice and anticipated future choice.
Results
Most participants felt they would like a choice between self-sampling and clinician screening (85%) and thought this would improve screening for them (72%). However, 23% felt it would be difficult to choose, 15% would worry about making a choice, and nearly half would prefer a recommendation (48%). Compared with women with degree-level education, those with fewer qualifications were more likely to say they would worry about having a choice or would not want a choice (p < 0.001). The majority said they would choose to self-sample at home if offered a choice in the future (69%; n = 1602/2320).
Conclusions
Self-sampling is likely to be popular, but offering a choice could cause worry for some people and many would prefer a recommendation. Supporting people to make a choice will be important, particularly for those with lower levels of education.
Abstract
Background
We assessed experiences of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaginal self‐sampling and future screening preferences in an ethnically and socio‐economically diverse group of women overdue for cervical screening.
Setting and Participants
A postal questionnaire was embedded in the YouScreen self‐sampling trial in England: 32.5% (2712/8338) of kit completers returned the survey. Kit non‐completers were encouraged to return a questionnaire, but no responses were received. Participants were ethnically diverse (40.3% came from ethnic minority backgrounds), and 59.1% came from the two most deprived quintiles. Differences in confidence in kit completion, trust in the test results and intention to attend a follow‐up test if HPV‐positive were evaluated using Pearson's χ 2 analyses. Binary logistic regression models explored predictors of a future screening choice and preferences for urine versus vaginal self‐sampling.
Results
Most kit‐completers reported high confidence in self‐sampling (82.6%) and high trust in the results (79.9%), but experiences varied by ethnicity and screening status. Most free‐text comments were positive but some reported difficulties using the device, pain or discomfort. Most women would opt for self‐sampling in the future (71.3% vs. 10.4% for a clinician‐taken test) and it was more often preferred by ethnic minority groups, overdue screeners and never attenders. Urine self‐tests were preferred to vaginal tests (41.9% vs. 15.4%), especially among women from Asian, Black or Other Ethnic backgrounds.
Conclusions
Kit‐completers were confident, found the test easy to complete, and trusted the self‐sample results. However, experiences varied by ethnic group and some women highlighted difficulties with the kit. Most women would prefer self‐sampling in the future, but it was not a universal preference, so offering a choice will be important.
Patient or Public Contribution
We did not have direct patient and public involvement and engagement (PPIE) in the questionnaire design. However, patients and public representatives did input into the design of the YouScreen trial and reviewed the wider study materials (e.g. participant information sheet).
Trial Registration
This questionnaire study was embedded in the YouScreen trial. The protocol for the YouScreen trial is available at https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN12759467. The National Institute for Health Research 43 Clinical Research Network (NIHR CRN) Central Portfolio Management System (CPMS) ID is 4441934.
Abstract
Objectives
This study assessed preferences for human papillomavirus (HPV) self-sampling if offered as an alternative to clinician-based screening at the point of invitation for cervical screening.
Setting and Methods
An online questionnaire was completed by screening-eligible women living in England (n = 3672). Logistic regressions explored associations between demographic characteristics and screening preferences, stratified by previous screening attendance. Reasons for preferences were also assessed.
Results
Half of participants (51.4%) intended to choose self-sampling, 36.5% preferred clinician screening, 10.5% were unsure, and <2% preferred no screening. More irregular and never attenders chose self-sampling, compared with regular attenders (71.1% and 70.1% vs. 41.0% respectively). Among regular attenders, self-sampling was preferred more frequently by the highest occupational grade, older and lesbian, gay and bisexual women, and those with experience of blood self-tests. In the irregular attender group, older women and those with experience of blood self-tests were more likely to choose self-sampling. In ‘never attenders’, self-sampling was less popular in ethnic minority groups.
Conclusions
If offered a choice of screening, around half of women in England may choose self-sampling, but a substantial proportion would still opt for clinician screening. Screening providers will need to manage a high take-up of self-sampling if many regular attenders switch to self-sampling.