Journal Articles
Permanent URI for this collectionhttps://mro.massey.ac.nz/handle/10179/7915
Browse
2 results
Search Results
Item Pasifika women's knowledge and perceptions of cervical-cancer screening and the implementation of self-testing in Aotearoa New Zealand: A qualitative study(Elsevier Ltd, 2022-11) Brewer N; Foliaki S; Gray M; Potter JD; Douwes JBACKGROUND: In Aotearoa New Zealand, Pasifika women have a higher rate of cervical cancer incidence and mortality than European/Other women and a lower screening rate. Despite actions to reduce the barriers, there has been little change in screening coverage for Pasifika women since 2007. Novel strategies are therefore required. Persistent cervical infection with oncogenic human papillomavirus (HPV) causes virtually all cervical cancers and HPV testing will be implemented in Aotearoa in 2023, with women being able to choose to self-test. We undertook a qualitative focus group (FG) study with Pasifika women to explore their perspectives on the barriers to, and facilitators of, HPV self-testing and how best to implement this in Aotearoa. METHODS: A trained female Pasifika Research Assistant facilitated participant recruitment and the FGs. Eligible participants self-identified as Pasifika, were aged 30-69 years, in the Wellington area, who had never been screened or who were overdue (≥5 years) for cervical-cancer screening. Recruitment was predominantly through Pasifika key-informant networks and in collaboration with Pasifika primary care providers. Participants were offered face-to-face FGs but, due to occasional Covid-19 restrictions and personal preferences, FGs via Zoom were also used. The FGs were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. The FG transcripts were thematically analysed. FINDINGS: Seven FGs were conducted with 24 participants. We identified five main themes around barriers and potential facilitators of HPV self-testing in Pasifika women: 1) perceptions and knowledge of cervical-cancer screening; 2) challenges to engaging in organised cervical screening; 3) perceptions of self-testing for HPV and challenges women face when deciding to self-test; 4) enthusiasm for an HPV self-test; and 5) information and communication. Knowledge about cervical cancer and screening varied considerably among participants, with some never having heard about cervical-cancer screening. The main challenges that were raised were personal privacy and confidentiality and time management. There was consensus around the need for adequate, consistent, and accurate accessible information to boost the confidence of women undertaking self-testing. In general, the participants were eager for self-testing to be made available soon. This was accompanied by the need for the promotion and implementation of self-testing to include a collective/community approach consistent with Pasifika worldviews. INTERPRETATION: Although participants were enthusiastic about HPV self-testing, multi-level and interacting barriers exist to participation by Pasifika women in HPV self-testing. Implementation of self-testing in Aotearoa New Zealand should be accompanied by clear information about the entire process, using culturally appropriate tailored educational campaigns in different Pasifika languages. FUNDING: The study was supported by the Collaboration for Cancer Research Aotearoa New Zealand (CCR).Item Acceptability of human papillomavirus (HPV) self-sampling among never- and under-screened Indigenous and other minority women: a randomised three-arm community trial in Aotearoa New Zealand.(Elsevier Ltd, 2021-11) Brewer N; Bartholomew K; Grant J; Maxwell A; McPherson G; Wihongi H; Bromhead C; Scott N; Crengle S; Foliaki S; Cunningham C; Douwes J; Potter JDBACKGROUND: Internationally, self-sampling for human papillomavirus (HPV) has been shown to increase participation in cervical-cancer screening. In Aotearoa New Zealand, there are long-standing ethnic inequalities in cervical-cancer screening, incidence, and mortality, particularly for indigenous Māori women, as well as Pacific and Asian women. METHODS: We invited never- and markedly under-screened (≥5 years overdue) 30-69-year-old Māori, Pacific, and Asian women to participate in an open-label, three-arm, community-based, randomised controlled trial, with a nested sub-study. We aimed to assess whether two specific invitation methods for self-sampling improved screening participation over usual care among the least medically served populations. Women were individually randomised 3:3:1 to: clinic-based self-sampling (CLINIC - invited to take a self-sample at their usual general practice); home-based self-sampling (HOME - mailed a kit and invited to take a self-sample at home); and usual care (USUAL - invited to attend a clinic for collection of a standard cytology sample). Neither participants nor research staff could be blinded to the intervention. In a subset of general practices, women who did not participate within three months of invitation were opportunistically invited to take a self-sample, either next time they attended a clinic or by mail. FINDINGS: We randomised 3,553 women: 1,574 to CLINIC, 1,467 to HOME, and 512 to USUAL. Participation was highest in HOME (14.6% among Māori, 8.8% among Pacific, and 18.5% among Asian) with CLINIC (7.0%, 5.3% and 6.9%, respectively) and USUAL (2.0%, 1.7% and 4.5%, respectively) being lower. In fully adjusted models, participation was statistically significantly more likely in HOME than USUAL: Māori OR=9.7, (95%CI 3.0-31.5); Pacific OR=6.0 (1.8-19.5); and Asian OR=5.1 (2.4-10.9). There were no adverse outcomes reported. After three months, 2,780 non-responding women were invited to participate in a non-randomised, opportunistic, follow-on substudy. After 6 months,192 (6.9%) additional women had taken a self-sample. INTERPRETATION: Using recruitment methods that mimic usual practice, we provide critical evidence that self-sampling increases screening among the groups of women (never and under-screened) who experience the most barriers in Aotearoa New Zealand, although the absolute level of participation through this population approach was modest. Follow-up for most women was routine but a small proportion required intensive support. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ANZCTR Identifier: ACTRN12618000367246 (date registered 12/3/2018) https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=371741&isReview=true; UTN: U1111-1189-0531. FUNDING: Health Research Council of New Zealand (HRC 16/405). PROTOCOL: http://publichealth.massey.ac.nz/assets/Uploads/Study-protocol-V2.1Self-sampling-for-HPV-screening-a-community-trial.pdf.
