Skip to main content

HPV Self-sampling in Indigenous Communities: A Scoping Review

Journal of Immigrant and Minority Health volume 22, pages 852–859 (2020)Cite this article

Abstract

Indigenous women have higher rates of cervical cancer and cervical cancer mortality compared to non-Indigenous women, as well as unique challenges to accessing screening services. Human papillomavirus (HPV) self-sampling has been demonstrated as an effective measure to reach under-screened women. A scoping review identified 19 sources matching selection criteria through a systematic search of PubMed and Scopus completed in May 2018. Analysis revealed that this is a limited field of research; albeit one that has undergone growth in the last 7 years. HPV self-sampling is identified as easy, convenient, comfortable and private and is often preferred over Papanicolaou (Pap) testing. Despite largely positive experiences, several studies indicated that some women lacked confidence in their ability to adequately self-sample. HPV self-sampling may be an effective intervention where Pap testing adherence is low but should include supporting resources and community input so as to best tailor implementations to each community.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

43,34 €

Price includes VAT (Finland)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

References

  1. Cervical Cancer Estimated Incidence, Mortality and Prevalence Worldwide in 2012. GLOBOCAN cancer fact sheets http://globocan.iarc.fr/old/FactSheets/cancers/cervix-new.asp. Accessed 12 June 2018

  2. Nanda K, McCrory DC, Myers ER, et al. Accuracy of the Papanicolaou test in screening for and follow-up of cervical cytologic abnormalities: a systematic review. Ann Intern Med. 2000;132:810–9.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Vasilevska M, Ross SA, Gesink D, Fisman DN. Relative risk of cervical cancer in indigenous women in Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United States: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Public Health Policy. 2012;33:148–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Moore SP, Antoni S, Colquhoun A, et al. Cancer incidence in indigenous people in Australia, New Zealand, Canada, and the USA: a comparative population-based study. Lancet Oncol. 2015;16:1483–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Walboomers JMM, Jacobs MV, Manos MM, et al. Human papillomavirus is a necessary cause of invasive cervical cancer worldwise. J Pathol. 1999;189:12–9.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Mayrand MH, Duarte-Franco E, Rodrigues I, et al. Human papillomavirus DNA versus Papanicolaou screening tests for cervical cancer. N Engl J Med. 2007;357:1579–88.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Koliopoulos G, Nyaga VN, Santesso N, et al. Cytology versus HPV testing for cervical cancer screening in the general population. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017;8:CD008587.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Dzuba IG, Díaz EY, Allen B, et al. The acceptability of self-collected samples for HPV testing vs. the pap test as alternatives in cervical cancer screening. J Women’s Health Gender-Based Med. 2002;11:265–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Petignat P, Faltin DL, Bruchim I, Tramer MR, Franco EL, Coutlee F. Are self-collected samples comparable to physician-collected cervical specimens for human papillomavirus DNA testing? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Gynecol Oncol. 2007;105:530–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Madzima TR, Vahabi M, Lofters A. Emerging role of HPV self-sampling in cervical cancer screening for hard-to-reach women: focused literature review. Can Fam Physician. 2017;63:597–601.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Verdoodt F, Jentschke M, Hillemanns P, Racey CS, Snijders PJF, Arbyn M. Reaching women who do not participate in the regular cervical cancer screening programme by offering self-sampling kits: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised trials. Eur J Cancer. 2015;51:2375–85.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Brackertz N: Who is hard and why? 2007. http://library.bsl.org.au/jspui/bitstream/1/875/1/Whois_htr.pdf. Accessed 14 June 2018

  13. Flanagan SM, Hancock B. Reaching the hard to reach’-lessons learned from the VCS (voluntary and community Sector). A qualitative study. BMC Health Serv Res. 2010;1:92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Carter S. Categories and terrains of exclusion: constructing the “Indian woman” in the early settlement era in Western Canada. Great Plains Quart. 1993;13:147–61.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Black AT. Cervical cancer screening strategies for Aboriginal women. Aborig Policy Res Consort Int. 2010;9:13–30.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Morgan L, Wabie J-L. Aboriginal women’s access and acceptance of reproductive health care. Pimatisjwin. 2012;10:313–26.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Wilson D, de la Ronde S, Brascoupe S, et al. Health professionals working with First Nations, Inuit, and Metis consensus guideline. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2013;35:550–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Maar M, Wakewich P, Wood B, et al. Strategies for increasing cervical cancer screening amongst first nations communities in Northwest Ontario, Canada. Health Care Women Int. 2016;37:478–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Racey CS, Gesink DC, Burchell AN, Trivers S, Wong T, Rebbapragada A. Randomized intervention of self-collected sampling for human papillomavirus testing in under-screened rural women: uptake of screening and acceptability. J Women’s Health. 2016;25:489–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Peters MD, Godfrey CM, Khalil H, McInerney P, Parker D, Soares CB. Guidance for conducting systematic scoping reviews. Int J Evid Based Healthc. 2015;13:141–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Dickinson J, Tsakonas E, Gorber SC, et al. Recommendations on screening for cervical cancer. Can Med Assoc J. 2013;185:35–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Curry SJ, Kirst AH, Owens DK, et al. Screening for cervical cancer US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. J Am Med Assoc. 2018;320:674–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Cerigo H, Coutlee F, Franco EL, Brassard P. Dry self-sampling versus provider-sampling of cervicovaginal specimens for human papillomavirus detection in the Inuit population of Nunavik, Quebec. J Med Screen. 2012;19:42–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Macdonald M, Franco E, Brassard P. HPV dectection by self-sampling in Nunavik, Quebec: inuit women’s sampling method preferences. J Aborig Health. 2013;8:29–30.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Gottschlich A, Rivera-Andrade A, Grajeda E, Alvarez C, Mendoza Montano C, Meza R. Acceptability of human papillomavirus self-sampling for cervical cancer screening in an indigenous Community in Guatemala. J Glob Oncol. 2017;3:444–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Zehbe I, Wakewich P, King AD, Morrisseau K, Tuck C. Self-administered versus provider-directed sampling in the Anishinaabek Cervical Cancer Screening Study (ACCSS): a qualitative investigation with Canadian First Nations women. BMJ Open. 2017;7:e017384.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. McLachlan E, Anderson S, Hawkes D, Saville M, Arabena K. Completing the cervical screening pathway: factors that facilitate the increase of self-collection uptake among under-screened and never-screened women, an Australian pilot study. Curr Oncol. 2018;25:e17–26.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Moscicki AB. Comparison between methods for human papillomavirus DNA testing: a model for self-testing in young women. J Infect Dis. 1993;167:723–5.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Wakewich P, Wood B, Davey C, Laframboise A, Zehbe I. Colonial legacy and the experience of First Nations women in cervical cancer screening: a Canadian multi-community study. Crit Public Health. 2016;26:368–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Wood B, Burchell AN, Escott N, et al. Using community engagement to inform and implement a community-randomized controlled trial in the Anishinaabek cervical cancer screening study. Front Oncol. 2014;4:27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Zehbe I, Moeller H, Severini A, et al. Feasibility of self-sampling and human papillomavirus testing for cervical cancer screening in First Nation women from Northwest Ontario, Canada: a pilot study. BMJ Open. 2011;1:e000030.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Zehbe I, Jackson R, Wood B, et al. Community-randomised controlled trial embedded in the Anishinaabek Cervical Cancer Screening Study: human papillomavirus self-sampling versus Papanicolaou cytology. BMJ Open. 2016;6:e011754.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Anderson S: Sisters doing it for themselves: developing a safe and acceptable self-collection model for cervical cancer screening. https://equitycancerscreening.ca/images/presentations/2016/1145a_Anderson.pdf. Accessed 14 June 2018

  34. Campbell L, Vail A: Women’s business: a pilot of Human Papillomavirus (HPV) self-sampling of Aboriginal women from rural Western NSW communities: evaluating a Nurse-Led Community Engagement Model. http://www.ruralhealth.org.au/14nrhc/sites/default/files/Campbell%2CLaurinnePPTsB5.pdf.

  35. Self-collection Pilot Project-improving access to cervical screening for under-screened women Evaluation Report. 2017. http://www.vcs.org.au/site/VCS/filesystem/documents/Articles/Selfcollection/pilotproject-finalreport(3).pdf. Accessed 14 June 2018

  36. Campbell L, Vail A, Pollard G-L, et al.: HPV self-sampling for cervical cancer screening: engaging under-screened rural and remote Aboriginal women. The National Rural Health Conference. 2017. http://www.ruralhealth.org.au/14nrhc/sites/default/files/Campbell%2CLaurinne_B5.pdf. Accessed 14 June 2018

  37. Allen-Leigh B, Uribe-Zúñiga P, León-Maldonado L, Brown BJ, Lörincz A, Salmeron J. Barriers to HPV self-sampling and cytology among low-income indigenous women in rural areas of a middle-income setting: a qualitative study. BMC Cancer. 2017;17:734.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Holme F, Camel C, Jeronimo J: Factors influencing acceptability of HPV self-sampling in guatemalan indigenous and nonindigenous communities. www.asccp.org/Assets/439176f5-e0ec…/59-guatemala-late-breaking-jeronimo-pdf. Accessed 6 July 2018

  39. Winer RL, Gonzales AA, Noonan CJ, Cherne SL, Buchwald DS, Collaborative to Improve Native Cancer O. Assessing acceptability of self-sampling kits, prevalence, and risk factors for human papillomavirus infection in American Indian Women. J Commun Health. 2016;41:1049–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Bartholomew K: Feasibility of a human papilloma virus (HPV) self-sampling for cervical screening in Maori women in West Auckland. 2017. http://apps.who.int/trialsearch/Trial2.aspx?TrialID=ACTRN12616001401448. Accessed 6 July 2018

  41. Brewer N: Human Papillomavirus (HPV) self-sampling among un- and under- screened Maori, Pacific and Asian women: a randomised controlled community trial to examine the effect of self-sampling on participation in cervical-cancer screening. 2018. http://apps.who.int/trialsearch/Trial2.aspx?TrialID=ACTRN12618000367246. Accessed 6 July 2018

  42. Van der Veen N: Framework for the execution of cervical cancer population screening. 2017. https://www.rivm.nl/dsresource?objectid=a54f1e59-2358-4192-a18a-6289cff8b57c&type=PDF. Accessed 6 July 2018

  43. National Cervical Screening Program. 2018. http://www.cancerscreening.gov.au/internet/screening/publishing.nsf/Content/about-the-new-test. Accessed 6 July 2018

  44. Israel BA, Schulz AJ, Parker EA, Becker AB. Review of community-based research: assessing partnership approaches to improve public health. Annu Rev Public Health. 1998;19:173–202.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Jagosh J, Bush PL, Salsberg J, et al. A realist evaluation of community-based participatory research: partnership synergy, trust building and related ripple effects. BMC Public Health. 2015;15:725.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Funded in part by the McGill Global Health Programs and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research.

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Center for Clinical Epidemiology, Jewish General Hospital, Lady Davis Research Institute, 3755 Chemin de la Cote St-Catherine, H-424, Montreal, QC, H3T1E2, Canada

    Claire Styffe, Elyse Tratt & Paul Brassard

  2. Oral Health and Society Research Unit, Faculty of Dentistry, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada

    Mary Ellen Macdonald

  3. Department of Medicine and Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Occupational Health, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada

    Paul Brassard

Authors
  1. Claire Styffe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Elyse Tratt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mary Ellen Macdonald
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Paul Brassard
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Paul Brassard.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Styffe, C., Tratt, E., Macdonald, M.E. et al. HPV Self-sampling in Indigenous Communities: A Scoping Review. J Immigrant Minority Health 22, 852–859 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10903-019-00954-x

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10903-019-00954-x

Keywords

  • HPV
  • Self-sampling
  • Indigenous
  • Screening
  • Cervical cancer