Reaching women who do not participate in the regular cervical cancer screening programme by offering self-sampling kits: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised trials

被引:220
作者
Verdoodt, F. [1 ]
Jentschke, M. [2 ]
Hillemanns, P. [2 ]
Racey, C. S. [3 ]
Snijders, P. J. F. [4 ]
Arbyn, M. [1 ]
机构
[1] Belgian Canc Ctr, Sci Inst Publ Hlth, Canc Epidemiol Unit, B-1050 Brussels, Belgium
[2] Hannover Med Sch, Dept Obstet & Gynaecol, D-30625 Hannover, Germany
[3] Univ Toronto, Dalla Lana Sch Publ Hlth, Toronto, ON M5T 3M7, Canada
[4] Vrije Univ Amsterdam Med Ctr, Dept Pathol, NL-1081 HV Amsterdam, Netherlands
关键词
Self-sampling; HPV; Screening attendance; Cervical cancer; Meta-analysis; Randomised trial; HUMAN-PAPILLOMAVIRUS; COLLECTED SAMPLES; PAP-SMEAR; PREVENTION; SPECIMENS; NONRESPONDERS; NONATTENDERS; ACCURACY; ATTEND;
D O I
10.1016/j.ejca.2015.07.006
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Introduction: Population coverage for cervical cancer screening is an important determinant explaining differences in the incidence of cervical cancer between countries. Offering devices for self-sampling has the potential to increase participation of hard-to-reach women. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to evaluate the participation after an invitation including a self-sampling device (self-sampling arm) versus an invitation to have a sample taken by a health professional (control arm), sent to under-screened women. Results: Sixteen randomised studies were found eligible. In an intention-to-treat analysis, the pooled participation in the self-sampling arm was 23.6% (95% confidence interval (CI) = 20.2-27.3%), when self-sampling kits were sent by mail to all women, versus 10.3% (95% CI = 6.2-15.2%) in the control arm (participation difference: 12.6% [95% CI = 9.3-15.9]). When women had to opt-in to receive the self-sampling device, as used in three studies, the pooled participation was not higher in the self-sampling compared to the control arm (participation difference: 0.2% [95% CI = -4.5-4.9%]). Conclusion: An increased participation was observed in the self-sampling arm compared to the control arm, if self-sampling kits were sent directly to women at their home address. However, the size of the effect varied substantially among studies. Since participation was similar in both arms when women had to opt-in, future studies are warranted to discern opt-in scenarios that are most acceptable to women. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:2375 / 2385
页数:11
相关论文
共 52 条
[21]   Coverage of cervical cancer screening in 57 countries: Low average levels and large inequalities [J].
Gakidou, Emmanuela ;
Nordhagen, Stella ;
Obermeyer, Ziad .
PLOS MEDICINE, 2008, 5 (06) :863-868
[22]   Cervical cancer screening in Germany: group-specific participation rates in the state of Niedersachsen (Lower Saxony). A study with health insurance data [J].
Geyer, Siegfried ;
Jaunzeme, Jelena ;
Hillemanns, Peter .
ARCHIVES OF GYNECOLOGY AND OBSTETRICS, 2015, 291 (03) :623-629
[23]   Experience with high-risk human papillomavirus testing on vaginal brush-based self-samples of non-attendees of the cervical screening program [J].
Gok, Murat ;
van Kemenade, Folkert J. ;
Heideman, Danielle A. M. ;
Berkhof, Johannes ;
Rozendaal, Lawrence ;
Spruyt, Johan W. M. ;
Belien, Jeroen A. M. ;
Babovic, Milena ;
Snijders, Peter J. F. ;
Meijer, Chris J. L. M. .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CANCER, 2012, 130 (05) :1128-1135
[24]   HPV testing on self collected cervicovaginal lavage specimens as screening method for women who do not attend cervical screening: cohort study [J].
Gok, Murat ;
Heideman, Danielle A. M. ;
van Kemenade, Folkert J. ;
Berkhof, Johannes ;
Rozendaal, Lawrence ;
Spruyt, Johan W. M. ;
Voorhorst, Feja ;
Belien, Jeroen A. M. ;
Babovic, Milena ;
Snijders, Peter J. F. ;
Meijer, Chris J. L. M. .
BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2010, 340 :905
[25]   Effectiveness of VIA, Pap, and HPV DNA Testing in a Cervical Cancer Screening Program in a Peri-Urban Community in Andhra Pradesh, India [J].
Gravitt, Patti E. ;
Paul, Proma ;
Katki, Hormuzd A. ;
Vendantham, Haripriya ;
Ramakrishna, Gayatri ;
Sudula, Mrudula ;
Kalpana, Basany ;
Ronnett, Brigitte M. ;
Vijayaraghavan, K. ;
Shah, Keerti V. .
PLOS ONE, 2010, 5 (10)
[26]   Vaginal self-sampling is a cost-effective way to increase participation in a cervical cancer screening programme: a randomised trial [J].
Haguenoer, K. ;
Sengchanh, S. ;
Gaudy-Graffin, C. ;
Boyard, J. ;
Fontenay, R. ;
Marret, H. ;
Goudeau, A. ;
de Laroche, N. Pigneaux ;
Rusch, E. ;
Giraudeau, B. .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF CANCER, 2014, 111 (11) :2187-2196
[27]   metan: fixed- and random-effects meta-analysis [J].
Harris, Ross J. ;
Bradburn, Michael J. ;
Deeks, Jonathan J. ;
Harbord, Roger M. ;
Altman, Douglas G. ;
Sterne, Jonathan A. C. .
STATA JOURNAL, 2008, 8 (01) :3-28
[28]  
Higgins JP, 2011, BMJ, V343, pd5928, DOI [DOI 10.1136/BMJ.D5928, 10.1136/bmj.d5928]
[29]   Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses [J].
Higgins, JPT ;
Thompson, SG ;
Deeks, JJ ;
Altman, DG .
BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2003, 327 (7414) :557-560
[30]   Self-Collection for Vaginal Human Papillomavirus Testing: Systematic Review of Studies Asking Women Their Perceptions [J].
Huynh, Jennifer ;
Howard, Michelle ;
Lytwyn, Alice .
JOURNAL OF LOWER GENITAL TRACT DISEASE, 2010, 14 (04) :356-362