TY - JOUR
T1 - Comparison of diagnostic accuracy and acceptability of self-sampling devices for human Papillomavirus detection
T2 - A systematic review
AU - Aimagambetova, Gulzhanat
AU - Atageldiyeva, Kuralay
AU - Marat, Aizada
AU - Suleimenova, Assem
AU - Issa, Torgyn
AU - Raman, Sarina
AU - Huang, Timothy
AU - Ashimkhanova, Ayimkul
AU - Aron, Saida
AU - Dongo, Andrew
AU - Iztleuov, Yerbolat
AU - Shamkeeva, Saykal
AU - Azizan, Azliyati
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2024 The Author(s)
PY - 2024/2
Y1 - 2024/2
N2 - Objective: Cervical cancer screening coverage remains low in many countries worldwide. Self-sampling approach for cervical cancer screening has a good potential to improve the screening coverage. This study aims to compare different types of HPV self-sampling devices for cervical cancer screening to identify the most accurate and acceptable device(s). Methods: A systematic review was performed on data extracted from all studies specific to HPV self-sampling devices by searching relevant articles in PubMed, Google Scholar, Scopus, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, Cochrane Library, and EBSCO published from 2013 to October 2023. The study was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022375682). Results: Overall, 70 papers met the eligibility criteria for this systematic review and were included in the analysis: 22 studies reported self-sampling devices diagnostic accuracy, 32 studies reported self-sampling devices acceptability and 16 studies reported both (accuracy and acceptability). The most popular self-sampling devices were Evalyn Brush, FLOQ Swab, Cervex-Brush, and Delphi Screener. Out of overall 38 studies analyzing self-sampling devices’ diagnostic accuracy, 94.7% of studies reported that self-collected specimens provided sensitivity and specificity comparable with clinician-collected samples; acceptability of Evalyn Brush, FLOQ Swab, Delphi Screener, and Colli-Pee, varied between 84.2% and 100%. Conclusion: The self-sampling approach has a good potential to increase cervical cancer screening coverage. Evalyn Brush, Cervex-Brush, FLOQ Swab, and Delphi Screener self-sampling devices for HPV detection were the most commonly utilized and found to be the most accurate, and patient-acceptable. HPV detection accuracy using these self-sampling devices had no significant difference compared to the sampling performed by healthcare providers.
AB - Objective: Cervical cancer screening coverage remains low in many countries worldwide. Self-sampling approach for cervical cancer screening has a good potential to improve the screening coverage. This study aims to compare different types of HPV self-sampling devices for cervical cancer screening to identify the most accurate and acceptable device(s). Methods: A systematic review was performed on data extracted from all studies specific to HPV self-sampling devices by searching relevant articles in PubMed, Google Scholar, Scopus, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, Cochrane Library, and EBSCO published from 2013 to October 2023. The study was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022375682). Results: Overall, 70 papers met the eligibility criteria for this systematic review and were included in the analysis: 22 studies reported self-sampling devices diagnostic accuracy, 32 studies reported self-sampling devices acceptability and 16 studies reported both (accuracy and acceptability). The most popular self-sampling devices were Evalyn Brush, FLOQ Swab, Cervex-Brush, and Delphi Screener. Out of overall 38 studies analyzing self-sampling devices’ diagnostic accuracy, 94.7% of studies reported that self-collected specimens provided sensitivity and specificity comparable with clinician-collected samples; acceptability of Evalyn Brush, FLOQ Swab, Delphi Screener, and Colli-Pee, varied between 84.2% and 100%. Conclusion: The self-sampling approach has a good potential to increase cervical cancer screening coverage. Evalyn Brush, Cervex-Brush, FLOQ Swab, and Delphi Screener self-sampling devices for HPV detection were the most commonly utilized and found to be the most accurate, and patient-acceptable. HPV detection accuracy using these self-sampling devices had no significant difference compared to the sampling performed by healthcare providers.
KW - Cervical cancer screening
KW - Cervical self-sampling
KW - HPV
KW - HPV self-sampling
KW - HPV self-sampling device
KW - Self-sampling
KW - Self-sampling device
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85182368298&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85182368298&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.pmedr.2024.102590
DO - 10.1016/j.pmedr.2024.102590
M3 - Review article
AN - SCOPUS:85182368298
SN - 2211-3355
VL - 38
JO - Preventive Medicine Reports
JF - Preventive Medicine Reports
M1 - 102590
ER -