No longer recommended for cervical screening: How women aged 18-24 feel about the renewed National Cervical Screening Program.

BACKGROUND: Since December 2017, the Australian National Cervical Screening Program no longer recommends screening for women under 25 years of age. AIM: To explore the attitudes of women under 25 years toward the changes. METHODS: In December 2019, women aged 18-24, residing in Australia, were recruited via the social media platform Instagram and Facebook. Descriptive analysis, t-tests, χ2 tests and multivariable regressions were used to analyse the data. RESULTS: Five hundred and twelve women completed a cross-sectional web-based survey. Women who were older (22-24: 3.1 vs 18-21: 2.8, P < 0.001), sexually active (3.1 vs 2.7, P = 0.003), vaccinated against human papillomavirus (mean = 3.2 vs 2.7, P = 0.005) or who had screened previously (mean = 3.5 vs 2.8, P < 0.001) had significantly greater knowledge about the current cervical screening practices. Older women (odds ratio (OR) = 0.85, 95% CI 0.80-0.95) or those who had screened previously (OR = 0.51, 95% CI 0.31-0.83) were less positive about the delayed start age of screening and five-yearly screening (OR = 0.54, 95% CI 0.35-0.85). A significant association was determined between being sexually active (χ2 (4) = 32.71, P < 0.001) and women who had screened previously (χ2 (4) = 34.43, P < 0.001), with a greater intention to screen in the future. Regarding health information, 64.6% of women had never heard of the 'National Cervical Screening Program' website and 38.9% of the sample (n = 199/512) reported they had 'rarely' noticed any health information regarding cervical screening in the past 12 months. CONCLUSION: Further work is required to rectify women's knowledge of cervical screening to ensure women under 25 are aware of the screening guidelines and reduce the potential for over-testing and overtreatment in this age group.

Active surveillance as a management option for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2: An online experimental study.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate framing of active surveillance as a management option for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN)2 in women of childbearing age. METHODS: We conducted a between-subjects factorial (2 × 2) randomised experiment. Women aged 25-40 living in Australia were presented with the same hypothetical pathway of testing human papillomavirus (HPV)-positive, high-grade cytology and a diagnosis of CIN2, through an online survey. They were randomised to one of four groups to evaluate the effects of (i) framing (method of explaining resolution of abnormal cells) and (ii) inclusion of an overtreatment statement (included versus not). Primary outcome was management choice following the scenario: active surveillance or surgery. RESULTS: 1638 women were randomised. Overall, preference for active surveillance was high (78.9%; n = 1293/1638). There was no effect of framing or providing overtreatment information, or their interaction, on management choice. After adjusting for intervention received, age, education, and other model covariates, participants were more likely to choose active surveillance over surgery if they had not already had children, had plans for children in the future, had no family history of cancer, had no history of endometriosis, had adequate health literacy, and more trust in their GP. Participants were less likely to choose active surveillance over surgery if they were more predisposed to seek health care for minor problems. CONCLUSIONS: Although we found no framing effect across the four conditions, we found a high level of preference for active surveillance with associations of increased preference that accord with the desire to minimise potential risks of CIN2 treatment on obstetric outcomes. These are valuable data for future clinical trials of active surveillance for management of CIN2 in younger women of childbearing age. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12618002043213, 20/12/2018, prior to participant enrolment).

Women's experiences of the renewed National Cervical Screening Program in Australia 12 months following implementation: a qualitative study.

OBJECTIVE: To explore women's experiences of the renewed National Cervical Screening Program in Australia from the perspective of women who have received different human papillomavirus (HPV) test results. Women aged 25 to 74 are now screened every 5 years with primary HPV screening. DESIGN: Qualitative interview study. SETTING: Australia. PARTICIPANTS: Women in Australia aged 25 to 74 who reported participating in cervical screening since December 2017, purposively sampled by test result (HPV positive, HPV negative and HPV status unknown). METHODS: 26 interviews with women aged 25 to 74 were conducted and analysed thematically. RESULTS: Three main themes emerged: knowledge and attitudes about the programme changes, information dissemination, the meaning and responses to test results and the new cervical screening test (CST). Some women showed little awareness of the changes, but others understood that HPV is detected earlier than abnormal cells. Some expressed positive attitudes towards the CST and were not anxious about less frequent screening. Most women envisaged the changes would have minimal impact on their screening behaviour. Women mainly wanted more information about the changes and the possible results from the new CST. Overall women could recall their HPV results and understand the implications for future cervical screening. Anxiety about being at 'increased risk' was more apparent in women who were HPV positive without history of abnormal results. CONCLUSIONS: Women show some understanding of HPV and the new CST, but more written and public communication about the changes and possible results are warranted. Efforts are needed to ensure that women who are HPV positive without history of abnormal results receive the information needed to alleviate anxiety.

Web-Based Health Information Following the Renewal of the Cervical Screening Program in Australia: Evaluation of Readability, Understandability, and Credibility.

BACKGROUND: Three main changes were implemented in the Australian National Cervical Screening Program (NCSP) in December 2017: an increase in the recommended age to start screening, extended screening intervals, and change from the Papanicolaou (Pap) test to primary human papillomavirus screening (cervical screening test). The internet is a readily accessible source of information to explain the reasons for these changes to the public. It is important that web-based health information about changes to national screening programs is accessible and understandable for the general population. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate Australian web-based resources that provide information about the changes to the cervical screening program. METHODS: The term cervical screening was searched in 3 search engines. The first 10 relevant results across the first 3 pages of each search engine were selected. Overall, 2 authors independently evaluated each website for readability (Flesch Reading Ease [FRE], Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level, and Simple Measure of Gobbledygook [SMOG] index), quality of information (Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool [PEMAT] for printable materials), credibility (Journal of the American Medical Association [JAMA] benchmark criteria and presence of Health on the Net Foundation code of conduct [HONcode] certification), website design, and usability with 5 simulation questions to assess the relevance of information. A descriptive analysis was conducted for the readability measures, PEMAT, and the JAMA benchmark criteria. RESULTS: Of the 49 websites identified in the search, 15 were eligible for inclusion. The consumer-focused websites were classed as fairly difficult to read (mean FRE score 51.8, SD 13.3). The highest FRE score (easiest to read) was 70.4 (Cancer Council Australia Cervical Screening Consumer Site), and the lowest FRE score (most difficult to read) was 33.0 (NCSP Clinical Guidelines). A total of 9 consumer-focused websites and 4 health care provider-focused websites met the recommended threshold (sixth to eighth grade; SMOG index) for readability. The mean PEMAT understandability scores were 87.7% (SD 6.0%) for consumer-focused websites and 64.9% (SD 13.8%) for health care provider-focused websites. The mean actionability scores were 58.1% (SD 19.1%) for consumer-focused websites and 36.7% (SD 11.0%) for health care provider-focused websites. Moreover, 9 consumer-focused and 3 health care provider-focused websites scored above 70% for understandability, and 2 consumer-focused websites had an actionability score above 70%. A total of 3 websites met all 4 of the JAMA benchmark criteria, and 2 websites displayed the HONcode. CONCLUSIONS: It is important for women to have access to information that is at an appropriate reading level to better understand the implications of the changes to the cervical screening program. These findings can help health care providers direct their patients toward websites that provide information on cervical screening that is written at accessible reading levels and has high understandability.