Comparison of Satisfaction Between Menstrual Pad-Based HPV Self-Collection and Clinician-Collected HPV DNA Testing in Thai Women
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Cervical cancer remains a significant public health concern in Thailand, where participation in screening programs is limited due to psychological, cultural, and logistical barriers. Menstrual pad-based HPV self-collection (Q-pad) presents a non-invasive, private, and potentially acceptable alternative to clinician-collected HPV testing. This study aimed to compare the acceptability of Q-pad self-collection with clinician-collected thin-layer liquid-based HPV DNA testing, and to explore factors influencing women’s screening preferences.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted among 158 Thai women aged ≥35 years undergoing annual health check-ups. Each participant underwent both clinician-collected HPV DNA testing and Q-pad self-collection at home. Satisfaction levels were assessed using a five-point Likert scale, and qualitative feedback was collected through open-ended responses. Descriptive analysis was performed to compare satisfaction levels and identify key themes related to user preferences and barriers.
RESULTS: Most participants (83.5%) reported equal satisfaction for both methods. For the Q-pad test, 91.8% of participants rated the experience as “very good” or “excellent,” while 98.1% did so for the clinician-collected test. A minority expressed a preference, with 13.3% favouring clinician collection due to perceived accuracy and 3.2% preferring self-collection for its privacy and comfort. Both screening methods received high levels of satisfaction. For the Q-pad test, 91.8% of participants rated the experience as “very good” or “excellent,” while 98.1% did so for the clinician-collected test.
CONCLUSION: Q-pad self-collection demonstrated high levels of participant satisfaction, nearly comparable to clinician-collected HPV testing. These findings suggest that Q-pad self-collection is an acceptable alternative screening approach that could complement existing clinician-based programs
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licence, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
References
Arbyn M, Weiderpass E, Bruni L, et al. Estimates of incidence and mortality of cervical cancer in 2018: a worldwide analy sis. Lancet Glob Health 2020;8(2):e191-e203. doi: 10.1016/S2214-109X(19)30482-6.
Insamran W, Sangrajrang S. National Cancer Control Program of Thailand. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 2020;21(3):577-82. doi: 10.31557/APJCP.2020.21.3.577.
World Health Organization. Global strategy to accelerate the elimination of cervical cancer as a public health problem. Geneva: WHO; 2020.
National Cancer Institute T. Cancer in Thailand 2021. Ministry of Public Health; 2021.
Srivatanakul P, Ohshima H, Sriplung H. Cervical cancer prevention in Thailand: national program and beyond. Jpn J Clin Oncol 2015;45(11):1090-6. doi: 10.31557/APJCP.2021.22.1.25
Choi HC, Leung K, Wu JT. Cervical screening among Chinese females in the era of HPV vaccination: a population-based survey on screening uptake and regular screening following an 18-year organized screening program. J Gynecol Oncol 2024;35(2):e20. doi:10.3802/jgo.2024.35.e20.
Rositch AF, Gatuguta A, Choi RY, et al. Knowledge and acceptability of Pap smears, self-sampling and HPV vaccination among adult women in Kenya. PloS one 2012;7(7):e40766. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0040766.
Papanicolaou GN, Traut HF. The diagnostic value of vaginal smears in carcinoma of the uterus.1941. Arch J Pathol Lab Med 1997;121(3):211-24.
Nelson EJ, Maynard BR, Loux T, et al. The acceptability of self-sampled screening for HPV DNA: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Sex Transm Infect 2017;93(1):56-61. doi: 10.1136/sextrans-2016-052609.
Wong LP, Wong YL, Low WY, et al. Knowledge and awareness of cervical cancer and screening among Malaysian women who have never had a Pap smear: a qualitative study. Singapore Med J 2009;50(1):49-53.
Lim GCC, Rampal S, Halimah Y. Cancer incidence in Peninsular Malaysia, 2003–2005: The third report of the National Cancer Registry, Malaysia. National Cancer Registry, Ministry of Health Malaysia; 2008. ISSN 1675-8870.
Gu C, Chan CW, Twinn SF. How sexual history and knowledge of cervical cancer and screening influence Chinese women’s screening behavior in mainland China. Cancer Nurs. 2010;33(6):445-53. doi: 10.1097/NCC.0b013e3181e456dc.
Ackerson K, Gretebeck K. Factors influecing cancer screening practices of underserved women. J Am Acad Nurse Pract 2007;19(11):591-601. doi: 10.1111/j.1745-7599.2007.00268.x.
Arbyn M, Smith SB, Temin S, et al. Detecting cervical precancer and reaching under-screened women by using HPV testing on self samples: updated meta-analyses. BMJ 2018;363:k4823. doi: 10.1136/bmj.k4823.
Racey CS, Withrow DR, Gesink D. Self-collected HPV testing improves participation in cervical cancer screening: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Can J Public Health 2013;104(2):e159-e66. doi: 10.1007/BF03405681.
Yeh PT, Kennedy CE, de Vuyst H, et al. Self-sampling for HPV testing: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ Glob Health 2019;4(3):e001351. doi: 10.1136/bmjgh-2018-001351.
Dzuba IG, Díaz EY, Allen B, et al. The acceptability of self-collected samples for HPV testing vs. the Pap test as alternatives in cervical cancer screening. J Womens Health Gend Based Med 2002;11(3):265-75. doi: 10.1089/152460902753668466.
Rabinowitz D, Lowenstein L, Gruenwald I. Fear of vaginal penetration in the absence of pain as a separate category of female sexual dysfunction: a conceptual overview. Rambam Maimonides Med J. 2017;8(2):e0016. doi:10.5041/ RMMJ.10293.
Lim YJ, Lee K, Park SY. Comparison of acceptability and performance of self-sampling with brush and swab among older women. J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2020;46(3):378-85.
Qvin C. Q-Pad Clinical White Paper. Qvin Inc; 2022.
Vahabi M, Lofters A. Muslim immigrant women and cervical cancer screening: a socioecological approach. Women Health. 2016;56(6):620-42.
Nishimura H, Yeh PT, Oguntade H, et al. HPV self-sampling for cervical cancer screening: a systematic review of values and preferences. BMJ Glob Health 2021;6(5):e003743. doi: 10.1136/bmjgh-2020-003743.
Rebolj M, Rimmer J, Denton K, et al. Primary cervical screening with high risk human papillomavirus testing: observational study. BMJ 2019;364:l240. doi: 10.1136/bmj. l240.
Sudenga SL, Rositch AF, Otieno WA, et al. Knowledge, attitudes, practices, and perceived risk of cervical cancer among Kenyan women: brief report. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2013;23(5):895-9. doi: 10.1097/IGC.0b013e31828e425c.
World Health Organization. Self-care interventions for health: Sexual and reproductive health and rights. WHO; 2021.
Zhao XL, Zhao S, Xia CF, et al. Cost-effectiveness of the screen-and-treat strategies using HPV test linked to thermal ablation for cervical cancer prevention in China: a modeling study. BMC Med 2023;21(1):149. doi: 10.1186/s12916-023 02840-8.
