Spanish 
Chinese 
Russian 
German 
French 
Japanese 
Portuguese 
Hindi 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: Paul.Reiter@osumc.edu |
|
| 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
