Journal of Womens Health, Issues and Care ISSN: 2325-9795

All submissions of the EM system will be redirected to Online Manuscript Submission System. Authors are requested to submit articles directly to Online Manuscript Submission System of respective journal.

Research Article, J Womens Health Issues Care Vol: 5 Issue: 1

Acceptability of Human Papillomavirus Self-Test Devices among Women from High-Risk Populations

Paul L Reiter1-3*, Morgan Richardson2, Barret J Zimmermann3, Deborah Moore4, Kathryn M Martin1, Deborah A Bartholomew1, Electra D Paskett1-3 and Mira L Katz1-3
1College of Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA
2Comprehensive Cancer Center, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA
3College of Public Health, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA
4Valley View Health Centers, Waverly, OH, USA
Corresponding author : Paul L. Reiter, Ph.D
Division of Cancer Prevention and Control, College of Medicine, The Ohio State University, Suite 525, 1590 North High Street, Columbus, Ohio 43201, USA
Tel: 614-366-4265; Fax: 614-293-5611;
E-mail: [email protected]
Received: December 17, 2015 Accepted: January 25, 2016 Published: January 29, 2016
Citation: Reiter PL, Richardson M, Zimmermann JB, Moore D, Martin KM, et al. (2016) Acceptability of Human Papillomavirus Self-Test Devices among Women from High-Risk Populations. J Womens Health, Issues Care 5:1. doi:10.4172/2325-9795.1000216

Abstract

Objective: There is growing interest in human papillomavirus (HPV) self-testing as a potential cervical cancer screening strategy, yet little is known about women’s views on different self-test devices. We examined the acceptability of several HPV self-test devices among women from two populations with cervical cancer disparities.
Methods: We conducted focus groups with Appalachian and African American women (n=34) in 2014 and 2015. Women provided both quantitative and qualitative feedback on four HPV self-test devices: Rovers® Viba-Brush (Device A [brush]); Evalyn® Brush (Device B [brush]); HerSwab® (Device C [swab]); and Delphi Screener® (Device D [lavage]). Quantitative survey items about the self-test devices used a 5-point Likert scale.
Results: Appalachian women were more willing to use Device B at home by themselves (mean=4.3) compared to Devices C (mean=2.9) and D (mean=2.5) (both p<0.05). African American women were also more willing to use Device B at home by themselves (mean=3.7) compared to Devices C (mean=2.7) and D (mean=2.4) (both p<0.05). In general, women tended to rate Devices B and A more positively than Devices C and D on device appearance and usability. Qualitative data identified several potential issues related to device appearance (e.g., color and size), usability (e.g., knowing how far to insert a device), and instructions (e.g., font size).
Conclusion: Women’s acceptability differed across the various HPV self-test devices, likely due to preferences regarding device appearance, usability, and the understandability of instructions. Findings will be highly useful for designing future HPV self-test programs and maximizing women’s participation in such programs

Keywords: HPV; Cervical cancer; Screening; Health disparities

Track Your Manuscript

Share This Page

Media Partners

Associations