Female health-care providers’ advocacy of self-sampling after participating in a workplace program for cervical cancer screening in Ghana

A mixed-methods study

Bibliographic Data

ID19529462
AuthorsAnna-Lisa Behnke (0000-0002-8118-7051, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin), Amrei Krings (0000-0001-9638-0885, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin), Comfort Mawusi Wormenor, Priscilla Dunyo, Andreas M Kaufmann (0000-0001-7732-3009, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, corresponding author), Joseph Emmanuel Amuah (University of Ottawa)
Year2020
Volume13
Issue1
Pages1838240-1838240
Publication date2020-12-31
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueGlobal Health Action (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1654-9716 • E-ISSN: 1654-9880
PublisherInforma UK Limited (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1080/16549716.2020.1838240
PMID33200671
OpenAlexW3101895299
LanguageEN
Citations received4
References cited38

BACKGROUND: Cervical cancer is the second most common cancer among Ghanaian women and screening coverage is low. ACCESSING is a cross-sectional study investigating human papillomavirus (HPV) prevalence via self-sampling in rural communities of the North Tongu district in Ghana. Female health-care providers (HCPs) were invited to self-collect a cervicovaginal sample with a commercial sampler in order to acquaint themselves with the sampling method. OBJECTIVE: This study set out to explore female HCPs' perceptions, advocacy for, and implications of self-sampling with the aim of enhancing self-sampling acceptability in the targeted screening population. METHODS: A mixed-methods approach was used, consisting of (a) a survey among 52 female HCPs working in a district hospital and (b) 10 one-to-one semi-structured interviews with purposefully sampled HCPs. RESULTS: The quantitative analysis of the survey (n = 52) showed that, among HCPs who took the sample themselves (50/52), all found it 'Easy' or 'Very Easy' and felt 'Very Comfortable' or 'Comfortable'. 82.7% indicated that they would undertake screening more often, and 98.1% indicated they would prefer self-sampling, if cervical cancer risk is as reliably determined as by clinician-directed cytobrush sampling. All interview participants (n = 10) indicated that they appreciated the program and would recommend the screening to their patients and/or family members and neighbours. Common reasons for preferring self-sampling were less (anticipated) pain compared to speculum examination and more privacy. CONCLUSIONS: Self-sampling for cervical cancer screening is highly acceptable to female HCPs. Setting up a workplace screening program that entails the option of self-sampling could create greater awareness and positive attitudes among HCPs to educating their patients, families, and neighbours on cervical cancer risks and motivate HCPs to advocate for women's participation in screening

Cancer · Cervical cancer · Cervical cancer screening · Environmental health · Family medicine · Health care · Population · Cervical Cancer and HPV Research · Global Cancer Incidence and Screening · Medicine · Nursing · Vaccine Coverage and Hesitancy

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access