Acceptability of self-sampling human papillomavirus test for cervical cancer screening in Japan: A questionnaire survey in the ACCESS trial

• Published in: PloS one 2023-06, Vol.18 (6), p.e0286909-e0286909
• Main Authors: Fujita, Misuzu, Nagashima, Kengo, Shimazu, Minobu, Suzuki, Misae, Tauchi, Ichiro, Sakuma, Miwa, Yamamoto, Setsuko, Hanaoka, Hideki, Shozu, Makio, Tsuruoka, Nobuhide, Kasai, Tokuzo, Hata, Akira
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Acceptability; Access to information; Biology and life sciences; Cancer; Cancer screening; Care and treatment; Cellular biology; Cervical cancer; Chi-square test; Clinical trials; Diagnosis; Human papillomavirus; Immunization; Medical screening; Medicine and Health Sciences; Oncology, Experimental; Papillomavirus infections; Papillomaviruses; People and Places; Performance evaluation; Physical Sciences; Prevention; Questionnaires; Regression analysis; Research and Analysis Methods; Sampling; Statistical analysis; Surveys
• ISSN: 1932-6203; 1932-6203
• DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0286909

In terms of medical policy for cervical cancer prevention, Japan lags far behind other industrialized countries. We initiated a randomized controlled trial to evaluate the self-sampling human papillomavirus (HPV) test as a tool to raise screening uptake and detection of pre-cancer. This study was conducted to explore the acceptability and preference of self-sampling using a subset of the data from this trial. A pre-invitation letter was sent to eligible women, aged 30-59 years who had not undergone cervical cancer screening for three or more years. After excluding those who declined to participate in this trial, the remaining women were assigned to the self-sampling and control groups. A second invitation letter was sent to the former group, and those wanting to undergo the self-sampling test ordered the kit. A self-sampling HPV kit, consent form, and a self-administered questionnaire were sent to participants who ordered the test. Of the 7,340 participants in the self-sampling group, 1,196 (16.3%) administered the test, and 1,192 (99.7%) answered the questionnaire. Acceptability of the test was favorable; 75.3-81.3% of participants agreed with positive impressions (easy, convenient, and clarity of instruction), and 65.1-77.8% disagreed with negative impressions (painful, uncomfortable, and embarrassing). However, only 21.2% were confident in their sampling procedure. Willingness to undergo screening with a self-collected sample was significantly higher than that with a doctor-collected sample (89.3% vs. 49.1%; p