Article

Testing positive for human papillomavirus in routine cervical screening: examination of psychosocial impact.

Screening and Test Evaluation Program, School of Public Health, University of Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia.
BJOG An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology (Impact Factor: 3.86). 01/2005; 111(12):1437-43. DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2004.00279.x
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT To examine the psychosocial impact of testing positive for high risk human papillomavirus (HPV) among women attending primary cervical screening.
Cross sectional survey. Measures were taken at baseline and one week after the receipt of HPV and cytology screening results.
Well women's clinic in London, UK. Population or Sample Four hundred and twenty-eight women aged 20-64 years.
Postal questionnaire survey.
Psychosocial and psychosexual outcomes were anxiety, distress and feelings about current, past and future sexual relationships.
Women with normal cytology who tested positive for HPV (HPV+) were significantly more anxious and distressed than women who were negative (HPV-) using both a state anxiety measure [F(1,267) = 29, P < 0.0001] and a screening specific measure of psychological distress [F(1,267) = 69, P < 0.0001]. Women with an abnormal or unsatisfactory smear result, who tested HPV+, were significantly more distressed than HPV- women with the same smear result [F(1,267) = 8.8, P = 0.002], but there was no significant difference in state anxiety. Irrespective of cytology result, HPV+ women reported feeling significantly worse about their sexual relationships. Approximately one-third of women who tested positive reported feeling worse about past and future sexual relationships compared with less than 2% of HPV- women.
The findings suggest that testing positive for HPV may have an adverse psychosocial impact, with increased anxiety, distress and concern about sexual relationships. Psychosocial outcomes of HPV testing need further investigation and must be considered alongside clinical and economic decisions to include HPV testing in routine cervical screening.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
84 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Countries must decide whether or not to replace primary cytology-based screening with primary human papillomavirus (HPV)-based screening. We aimed to assess how primary screening for an HPV infection, a sexually transmitted infection (STI), and the type of information included in the invitation letter, will affect screening intention. We randomized a representative sample of Norwegian women to one of three invitation letters: 1) Pap smear, 2) HPV testing or 3) HPV testing with additional information about the nature of the infection. Intention to participate, anxiety level and whether women intend to follow-up abnormal results were measured between groups using chi-squared and nonparametric Kruskal-Wallis tests. Determinants of intention were explored using logistic regression. Responses from 3540 women were representative of the Norwegian population with respect to age, civil status and geographic location. No significant difference across invitation letters was found in women's stated intention to participate (range: 91.8-92.3%), anxiety (39-42% were either quite or very worried) or to follow-up after an abnormal result (range: 97.1-97.6%). Strength of intention to participate was only marginally lower for HPV-based invitation letters, albeit significant (p-value = 0.008), when measured on a scale. Only 36-40% of respondents given the HPV invitations correctly understood that they likely had an STI. We found that switching to primary HPV screening, independent of additional information about HPV infections, is not likely to reduce screening participation rates or increase anxiety; however, women lacked the ability to interpret the meaning of an HPV-test result.
    BMC Public Health 04/2014; 14(1):360. · 2.32 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We aimed to determine whether PAX1/SOX1 methylation could be translated to clinical practice for cervical neoplasia detection when used alone and in combination with current cytology-based Pap screening. We conducted a multicenter case–control study in 11 medical centers in Taiwan from December 2009 to November 2010. Six hundred seventy-six patients were included in the analysis, including 330 in the training set and 346 in the testing set. Multiplex quantitative methylation-specific polymerase chain reaction (PCR) was performed with a TaqMan probe system using a LightCycler 480 Real-Time PCR System (Roche). The level of human papilloma virus (HPV) was analyzed using a Hybrid Capture 2 system (Digene). Receiver operating characteristic curves were generated to obtain the best cutoff values from the training data set. The sensitivities, specificities, and accuracies were validated in the testing set. The sensitivities for methylated (m) PAX1m and SOX1m and HPV testing for detecting CIN3+ lesions were 0.64, 0.71, and 0.89, and the specificities were 0.91, 0.77, and 0.68, respectively. Combined parallel testing of PAX1m/SOX1m tests with Pap smearing showed superior specificity (0.84/0.71 vs. 0.66, respectively) and similar sensitivity (0.93/0.96 vs. 0.97) to the combination of Pap smear results and HPV testing. Thus, combined parallel testing using Pap smears and PAX1 or SOX1 methylation tests may provide better performance than a combination of Pap smears with HPV testing in detection for cervical neoplasia.
    Cancer Medicine 04/2014;
  • Source
    Revista colombiana de obstetricia y ginecología 12/2010; 61(4):303-309.

Preview

Download
0 Downloads