Inclusive language in health policy - a timely case (study) of cervical screening in Australia.

Language is important in health policy development. Policy changes in Australia to increase cervical screening offers a timely case example to explore the function of inclusive language in health policy. Gender and sexuality diverse people with a cervix have been largely invisible within health promotion programs, which has led to reduced awareness of, and access to, cervical screening. Twenty-eight semi-structured interviews were conducted with 29 key informants between April and October 2022 about the role of inclusive language in cervical screening policy, promotion, and delivery in the context of a national program to promote cervical screening. Three themes were identified from what key informants believed to be the role of inclusive language: (1) the common goal of inclusive language as policy advocacy for broader inclusivity; (2) the inevitable partiality of inclusive language in policy as an opportunity to start conversation; and (3) policy as a bridge between essential but diffuse components of the health sector with multidirectional influences. Inclusive language was seen to operationalise equity in health policy within the broader aim of eliminating cervical cancer among under-screened populations.

Practitioners support and intention to adopt universal access to self-collection in Australia's National Cervical Screening Program.

OBJECTIVE: Primary care practitioners are crucial to engaging people in Australia's national cervical screening program. From July 2022, practitioners have been able to offer all screen-eligible people the choice to collect their own self-collected sample; an option introduced to increase equity. This study explored how practitioners are intending to incorporate universal access to self-collection into their clinical care. METHODS: Semi-structed interviews with 27 general practitioners, nurses, and practice managers from 10 practices in Victoria, Australia conducted between May and August 2022. Interviews were deductively coded, informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. The Diffusion of Innovations theory was used to categorise intention to provide self-collection. RESULTS: Participants were supportive of universal access to self-collection, citing benefits for screen-eligible people and that it overcame the limited adaptability of the previous policy. Most participants' practices (n = 7, 70%) had implemented or had plans to offer the option for self-collection to all. Participants deliberating whether to provide universal access to self-collection held concerns about the correct performance of the self-test and the perceived loss of opportunity to perform a pelvic examination. Limited time to change practice-level processes and competing demands within consultations were anticipated as implementation barriers. CONCLUSIONS: The extent to which self-collection can promote equity within the program will be limited without wide-spread adoption by practitioners. Communication and education that addresses concerns of practitioners, along with targeted implementation support, will be critical to ensuring that self-collection can increase participation and Australia's progression towards elimination of cervical cancer.

Primary care practice-based interventions and their effect on participation in population-based cancer screening programs: a systematic narrative review.

AIM: To provide a systematic synthesis of primary care practice-based interventions and their effect on participation in population-based cancer screening programs. BACKGROUND: Globally, population-based cancer screening programs (bowel, breast, and cervical) have sub-optimal participation rates. Primary healthcare workers (PHCWs) have an important role in facilitating a patient's decision to screen; however, barriers exist to their engagement. It remains unclear how to best optimize the role of PHCWs to increase screening participation. METHODS: A comprehensive search was conducted from January 2010 until November 2023 in the following databases: Medline (OVID), EMBASE, and CINAHL. Data extraction, quality assessment, and synthesis were conducted. Studies were separated by whether they assessed the effect of a single-component or multi-component intervention and study type. FINDINGS: Forty-nine studies were identified, of which 36 originated from the USA. Fifteen studies were investigations of single-component interventions, and 34 studies were of multi-component interventions. Interventions with a positive effect on screening participation were predominantly multi-component, and most included combinations of audit and feedback, provider reminders, practice-facilitated assessment and improvement, and patient education across all screening programs. Regarding bowel screening, provision of screening kits at point-of-care was an effective strategy to increase participation. Taking a 'whole-of-practice approach' and identifying a 'practice champion' were found to be contextual factors of effective interventions.The findings suggest that complex interventions comprised of practitioner-focused and patient-focused components are required to increase cancer screening participation in primary care settings. This study provides novel understanding as to what components and contextual factors should be included in primary care practice-based interventions.

The Implementation Experience of COVID-19 Rapid Antigen Testing in a Large-Scale Construction Project in Victoria, Australia.

The coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has caused major disruptions to industries and workplaces. Rapid Antigen Tests (RATs) for COVID-19, which allow individuals to self-administer tests and receive timely results without laboratory testing, provide the opportunity for surveillance testing of asymptomatic individuals in non-medical settings. However, the literature offers few lessons regarding how to create enabling conditions for effective and sustainable implementation in a workplace setting. Guided by the RE-AIM framework, we assessed factors associated with the adoption, implementation, and maintenance of mandatory RAT in a large-scale construction project in Victoria, Australia. We used a mixed methods approach involving site observation, worker surveys (n = 30), and interviews with 51 site workers and managers to understand the implementation experience. Factors which facilitated adoption included easy, non-invasive testing procedure; sense of workplace safety; and strong backing by management and acceptance by workers that RATs helped limit COVID-19-related lost days of work. Gaps in knowledge and adherence to testing protocols, logistical challenges (test kit supply, observation of test results), and low appetite for long-term, mandatory testing emerged as challenges for effective implementation and sustainability. As RAT becomes normalized in a range of workplace settings, strategies will be required to support the sustainability of implementation, including longer-term acceptability of surveillance testing and adherence to testing protocols. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s43477-023-00085-4.

'I'm a bit of a champion for it actually': qualitative insights into practitioner-supported self-collection cervical screening among early adopting Victorian practitioners in Australia.

BACKGROUND: Self-collection for cervical screening has been available in the Australian National Cervical Screening Program since 2017 and is now available to all people as an option for cervical screening through a practitioner-supported model. Documenting early adopting practitioner experiences with self-collection as a mechanism to engage people in cervical screening is crucial to informing its continuing roll-out and implementation in other health systems. AIM: This study aimed to describe the experiences of practitioners in Victoria, Australia, who used human papillomavirus (HPV)-based self-collection cervical screening during the first 17 months of its availability. METHODS: Interviews (n = 18) with practitioners from Victoria, who offered self-collection to their patients between December 2017 and April 2019, analysed using template analysis. FINDINGS: Practitioners were overwhelmingly supportive of self-collection cervical screening because it was acceptable to their patients and addressed patients' barriers to screening. Practitioners perceived that knowledge and awareness of self-collection were variable among the primary care workforce, with some viewing self-collection to be inferior to clinician-collected screening. Practitioners championed self-collection at an individual level, with the extent of practice-level implementation depending on resourcing. Concerns regarding supporting the follow-up of self-collected HPV positive patients were noted. Other practical barriers included gaining timely, accurate screening histories from the National Cancer Screening Register to assess eligibility. Practitioners' role surrounded facilitating the choice between screening tests through a patient-centred approach.

Self-Collection Cervical Screening in the Asia-Pacific Region: A Scoping Review of Implementation Evidence.

PURPOSE: Although cervical cancer is a disease of inequity, it can be eliminated as a public health problem through vaccination, screening, and treatment. Human papillomavirus vaginal self-collection cervical screening is a high-performance test that can increase reach of screening. This review describes the different contexts and models of care used to pilot or implement self-collection within the Asia-Pacific, measures the extent that implementation outcome measures are reported and, where available, summarizes key implementation findings. METHODS: A scoping review was conducted by searching five databases of the peer-reviewed literature on June 20, 2022. Two researchers assessed eligibility and extracted data independently to the model of care used and the Conceptual Framework for Implementation Outcomes. A mixed-method consolidation of findings (quantitative: count and frequencies; qualitative: content analysis) was undertaken to narratively report findings. RESULTS: Fifty-seven articles, comprising 50 unique studies from 11 countries and two special autonomous regions, were included; 82% were conducted in trials. The implementation of self-collection was conducted in low- (2%), lower-middle- (32%), upper-middle- (32%), and high-income (35%) settings, with 10 different delivery models used; 80% delivered through practitioner-supported models with diversity in how samples were processed, and treatment was offered. Acceptability (73%) and appropriateness (64%) measures were most reported, followed by adoption (57%), feasibility (48%), and fidelity (38%). Only 7% of articles reported implementation cost or penetration measures. No articles reported sustainability measures. CONCLUSION: The literature confirms that self-collection cervical screening has been implemented within the Asia-Pacific region, with evidence demonstrating that it is acceptable and appropriate from the user's perspective. Well-designed, high-quality implementation trials and real-world evaluations of self-collection that report the breadth of implementation outcomes can support the progression toward the elimination of cervical cancer.

"So, if she wasn't aware of it, then how would everybody else out there be aware of it?"-Key Stakeholder Perspectives on the Initial Implementation of Self-Collection in Australia's Cervical Screening Program: A Qualitative Study.

BACKGROUND: In December 2017, the Australian National Cervical Screening Program transitioned from 2-yearly cytology-based to 5-yearly human papillomavirus (HPV)-based cervical screening, including a vaginal self-collection option. Until July 2022, this option was restricted to under- or never-screened people aged 30 years and older who refused a speculum exam. We investigated the perspectives and experiences of stakeholders involved in, or affected by, the initial implementation of the restricted self-collection pathway. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 49 stakeholders as part of the STakeholder Opinions of Renewal Implementation and Experiences Study. All interviews were audio recorded and transcribed. Data were thematically analysed and coded to the Conceptual Framework for Implementation Outcomes. RESULTS: Stakeholders viewed the introduction of self-collection as an exciting opportunity to provide under-screened people with an alternative to a speculum examination. Adoption in clinical practice, however, was impacted by a lack of clear communication and promotion to providers, and the limited number of laboratories accredited to process self-collected samples. Primary care providers tasked with communicating and offering self-collection described confusion about the availability, participant eligibility, pathology processes, and clinical management processes for self-collection. Regulatory delay in developing an agreed protocol to approve laboratory processing of self-collected swabs, and consequently initially having one laboratory nationally accredited to process samples, led to missed opportunities and misinformation regarding the pathway's availability. CONCLUSIONS: Whilst the introduction of self-collection was welcomed, clear communication from Government regarding setbacks in implementation and how to overcome these in practice were needed. As Australia moves to a policy of providing everyone eligible for screening the choice of self-collection, wider promotion to providers and eligible people, clarity around pathology processes and the scaling up of test availability, as well as timely education and communication of clinical management practice guidelines, are needed to ensure smoother program delivery in the future. Other countries implementing self-collection policies can learn from the implementation challenges faced by Australia.

Health care system factors influencing primary healthcare workers' engagement in national cancer screening programs: a qualitative study.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to explore factors across the environment, organisation and care team levels of the health care system that influence the engagement of primary healthcare workers (PHCWs) in Australia's national cancer screening programs. METHODS: A cross-sectional qualitative study involving semi-structured interviews with PHCWs - general practitioners (n=10), practices nurses (n=10), and practice managers (n=10) from settings across Australia. Transcripts were analysed using the Framework Method. RESULTS: Two environment-level factors were found to influence several organisation and care team level factors. Firstly, the financial structure of primary health care, impacting on practitioner: time, practice culture, screening knowledge and opportunistic conversations. Secondly, the structure of screening programs had flow-on effects for: access to patient screening records, recall and reminder systems, and sense of program ownership. CONCLUSIONS: Encouraging more effective PHCW engagement in the screening programs requires the consideration and mitigation of overarching financial and structural barriers. Up-to-date and easy-to-use recall and reminder systems, whole-of-practice approaches which optimise the role of each PHCW and the identification of a 'champion' to drive implementation should be considered. IMPLICATIONS FOR PUBLIC HEALTH: This study offers insights into what elements practice and practitioner targeted initiatives in Australia should incorporate, potentially leading to improved engagement of PHCWs and increased cancer screening participation rates.

The experience of under-screened and never-screened participants using clinician-supported self-collection cervical screening within the Australian National Cervical Screening Program.

BACKGROUND: Australia has had significant successes in the prevention of cervical cancer. However, there is considerable scope for improving screening participation. In December 2017, Australia shifted from cytology to a human papillomavirus-based screening program as part of the renewed National Cervical Screening Program. This provided the opportunity to introduce a clinician-supported self-collection cervical screening pathway, which allows screening participants aged 30 years or more and who are under-screened or never-screened to screen via a self-collected human papillomavirus test. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to explore screening participant experiences of a clinician-supported self-collection cervical screening pathway. METHODS: Interviews (n = 45) were conducted with participants who had used the clinician-supported self-collection cervical screening pathway in the Australian National Cervical Screening Program between December 2017 and April 2019. Interviews were analyzed using template analysis. RESULTS: Under-screened and never-screened participants reported a variety of interrelated barriers to cervical screening due to the nature of the test. For these participants, self-collection was a preferable way to perform screening as it overcame various barriers, was easy to use and promoted a sense of empowerment. Participants reported that the role of their practitioner was influential in their decision to undertake cervical screening, and that the support and information provided was a key factor in their experiences of the self-collection pathway. CONCLUSION: Findings support the use of a clinician-supported model of care, as an alternative screening modality in Australia's National Cervical Screening Program. As more countries consider the move from a cytology to human papillomavirus-based cervical screening program, this model may assist in greater engagement of under-screened participants.

Self-collection cervical screening in the renewed National Cervical Screening Program: a qualitative study.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the implementation and acceptability of the self-collection cervical screening pathway since commencement of the renewed National Cervical Screening Program (rNCSP), from the perspectives of screening participants and primary care practitioners. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS: Qualitative study; individual semi-structured interviews with 45 screening participants and 18 primary care practitioners in Victoria who had engaged with the self-collection pathway during the first 17 months of the rNCSP (1 December 2017 - 30 April 2019). RESULTS: The self-collection pathway was highly acceptable as an alternative cervical screening pathway for most participating screening participants and practitioners. Some screening participants indicated that they would not have been screened had the pathway not been available. Acceptability was lower among those who had tested positive for HPV types not 16/18, a result that requires additional testing of a clinician-collected cervical sample. Use of the self-collection pathway is driven more by practitioners than their patients. Interpretations of the self-collection guidelines varied between practices. Barriers to expanding promotion of the pathway by practitioners included difficulties with identifying eligible participants. CONCLUSIONS: Increasing the accessibility of the self-collection pathway to under- and never screened women could reduce inequities in cervical cancer outcomes for those not participating in the main screening pathway. Practitioners should be provided resources to integrate self-collection into routine practice and to efficiently implement the entire self-collection pathway, in order to maximise its use and to optimise the experience for screening participants.