Search

Objectives: Many countries are now using primary human papillomavirus (HPV) testing for cervical screening, testing for high-risk HPV and using cytology as triage. An HPV-positive result can have an adverse psychological impact, at least in the short term. In this paper, we explore the psychological impact of primary HPV screening over 12 months.Methods: Women were surveyed soon after receiving their results (n=1133) and 6 (n=762) and 12 months (n=537) later. Primary outcomes were anxiety (Short-Form State Anxiety Inventory-6) and distress (General Health Questionnaire-12). Secondary outcomes included concern, worry about cervical cancer and reassurance. Mixed-effects regression models were used to explore differences at each time point and change over time across four groups according to their baseline result: control (HPV negative/HPV cleared/normal cytology and not tested for HPV); HPV positive with normal cytology; HPV positive with abnormal cytology; and HPV persistent (ie, second consecutive HPV-positive result).Results: Women who were HPV positive with abnormal cytology had the highest anxiety scores at baseline (mean=42.2, SD: 15.0), but this had declined by 12 months (mean=37.0, SD: 11.7) and was closer to being within the 'normal' range (scores between 34 and 36 are considered 'normal'). This group also had the highest distress at baseline (mean=3.3, SD: 3.8, scores of 3+ indicate case-level distress), but the lowest distress at 12 months (mean=1.9, SD: 3.1). At 6 and 12 months, there were no between-group differences in anxiety or distress for any HPV-positive result group when compared with the control group. The control group were less concerned and more reassured about their result at 6 and 12 months than the HPV-positive with normal cytology group.Conclusions: Our findings suggest the initial adverse impact of an HPV-positive screening result on anxiety and distress diminishes over time. Specific concerns about the result may be longer lasting and efforts should be made to address them. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Testing positive for human papillomavirus (HPV) at cervical cancer screening has been associated with heightened anxiety. To date, the cognitive determinants of heightened anxiety remain unclear, making it difficult to design effective interventions.Purpose: This study investigated latent illness representation profiles in women testing positive for HPV with no abnormal cells (normal cytology) and explored associations between these profiles and anxiety.Methods: Women aged 24-66 (n = 646) who had tested HPV-positive with normal cytology at routine HPV primary screening in England completed a cross-sectional survey shortly after receiving their result.Results: Latent profile analysis identified three distinct profiles of illness representations (termed "adaptive," "negative," and "negative somatic"), which differed significantly in their patterns of illness perceptions. Hierarchal linear regression revealed that these latent illness representation profiles accounted for 21.8% of the variance in anxiety, after adjusting for demographic and clinical characteristics. When compared with adaptive representations (Profile 1), women with negative representations (Profile 2) and negative somatic representations (Profile 3) had significantly higher anxiety, with clinically meaningful between-group differences (mean difference [MD] = 17.26, confidence interval [CI]: 14.29-20.22 and MD = 13.20, CI: 9.45-16.96 on the S-STAI-6, respectively).Conclusion: The latent illness representation profiles identified in this study provide support for the role of negative beliefs contributing to anxiety in women testing HPV-positive with normal cytology. Characteristics specific to subgroups of highly anxious women (Profiles 2 and 3) could be used by policymakers to target information in routine patient communications (e.g., test result letters) to reduce unnecessary burden. Future research should adopt longitudinal designs to understand the trajectory of illness representations from HPV diagnosis through to clearance versus persistence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Systematic reviews have identified effective strategies for increasing postal response rates to questionnaires; however, most studies have isolated single techniques, testing the effect of each one individually. Despite providing insight into explanatory mechanisms, this approach lacks ecological validity, given that multiple techniques are often combined in routine practice.Methods: We used a two-armed parallel randomised controlled trial (n = 2702), nested within a cross-sectional health survey study, to evaluate whether using a pragmatic combination of behavioural science and evidenced-based techniques (e.g., personalisation, social norms messaging) in a study invitation letter increased response to the survey, when compared with a standard invitation letter. Participants and outcome assessors were blinded to group assignment. We tested this in a sample of women testing positive for human papillomavirus (HPV) at cervical cancer screening in England.Results: Overall, 646 participants responded to the survey (response rate [RR] = 23.9%). Logistic regression revealed higher odds of response in the intervention arm (n = 357/1353, RR = 26.4%) compared with the control arm (n = 289/1349, RR = 21.4%), while adjusting for age, deprivation, clinical site, and clinical test result (aOR = 1.30, 95% CI: 1.09-1.55).Conclusion: Applying easy-to-implement behavioural science and evidence-based methods to routine invitation letters improved postal response to a health-related survey, whilst adjusting for demographic characteristics. Our findings provide support for the pragmatic adoption of combined techniques in routine research to increase response to postal surveys.Trial Registration: ISRCTN, ISRCTN15113095 . Registered 7 May 2019 - retrospectively registered. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Tens-of-millions of women every year test positive for human papillomavirus (HPV) at routine cervical screening. We performed a mixed-methods systematic review using a results-based convergent design to provide the first comprehensive overview of emotional response to testing positive for HPV (HPV+). We mapped our findings using the cognitive behavioural framework. Six electronic databases were searched from inception to 09-Nov-2019 and 33 papers were included. Random-effects meta-analyses revealed that HPV+ women with abnormal or normal cytology displayed higher short-term anxiety than those with normal results (MD on State-Trait Anxiety Inventory = 7.6, 95% CI: 4.59–10.60 and MD = 6.33, CI: 1.31–11.35, respectively); there were no long-term differences. Psychological distress (general/sexual/test-specific) was higher in HPV+ women with abnormal cytology in the short-term and long-term (SMD = 0.68, CI: 0.32–1.03 and SMD = 0.42, CI: 0.05–0.80, respectively). Testing HPV+ was also related to disgust/shame, surprise and fear about cancer. Broadly, adverse response related to eight cognitive constructs (low control, confusion, cancer-related concerns, relationship concerns, sexual concerns, uncertainty, stigma, low trust) and six behavioural constructs (relationship problems, social impact, non-disclosure of results, idiosyncratic prevention, indirect clinical interaction, changes to sexual practice). Almost exclusive use of observational and qualitative designs limited inferences of causality and conclusions regarding clinical significance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Guidelines for cervical cancer screening have been updated to include human papillomavirus (HPV) testing, which is more sensitive compared to cytology in detecting cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Because of its increased sensitivity, a negative HPV test is more reassuring for a woman that she is at low risk for precancerous cervical lesions than a negative Pap test. Prompted by the inadequate translation of HPV test-based screening guidelines into practice, we aimed to synthesize the literature regarding health care providers (HCPs) knowledge, attitudes, and practices related to HPV testing and the influence of psychosocial factors on HCPs acceptability of HPV testing in primary cervical cancer screening. Materials and Methods: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Global Health, and Web of Science for journal articles from January 1, 1980 to July 25, 2018. A narrative synthesis of HCPs knowledge, attitudes, and practices related to HPV testing is provided. Informed by the Patient Pathway framework, we used deductive thematic analysis to synthesize the influence of psychosocial factors on HCPs acceptability of HPV testing. Results: The most important HCP knowledge gaps are related to the superior sensitivity of the HPV test and age-specific guideline recommendations for HPV testing. Thirty to fifty percent of HCPs are not compliant with guideline recommendations for HPV testing, for example, screening at shorter intervals than recommended. Barriers, facilitators, and contradictory evidence of HCPs' acceptability of the HPV test are grouped by category: (1) factors related to the HCP; (2) patient intrinsic factors; (3) factors corresponding to HCP's practice environment; and (4) health care system factors. Conclusions: HCP's adherence to guidelines for HPV testing in cervical cancer screening is suboptimal and could be improved by specialty organizations ensuring consistency across guidelines. Targeted educational interventions to address barriers of HPV test acceptability identified in this review may facilitate the translation of HPV testing recommendations into practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]