{"title":"自取标本与临床医生采集标本在检测高危 HPV 感染方面的比较研究:一项前瞻性横断面研究。","authors":"Natnipa Parapob, Suree Lekawanvijit, Theera Tongsong, Kittipat Charoenkwan, Charuwan Tantipalakorn","doi":"10.5468/ogs.24117","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The primary objective of this study was to compare the detection rate of high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) infection between self-sampling to collect vaginal specimens and clinician sampling to collect cervical specimens, as well as the correlation between the two techniques. The secondary objective was to assess satisfaction with self-sampling for HPV testing.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>From October 2021 to September 2022, women positive for HPV 16/18 and other 12 high-risk HPV genotypes and cytological ASCUS were enrolled. All participants were instructed on the method for self-collection of HPV samples. Self-collected vaginal samples and clinician-collected cervical samples were subjected to HPV DNA typing.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Paired self- and clinician-collected specimens were obtained from 104 women with positive HPV-positive results. The detection rate of high-risk HPV infection was comparable between the two techniques: 79/98 (80.6%) vs. 81/98 (82.7%) for the self-sampling and clinician-sampling techniques, respectively (McNemar's test; P=0.774). The agreement in detecting HPV infection was substantial, with a kappa coefficient of 0.75. More than 90% of the participants rated self-collection as satisfactory to very satisfactory because of its convenience and safety. Regarding methods of further follow-up, 51% of the participants chose self-sampling, whereas the remaining participants preferred collection by clinicians. No intervention-related complications were observed.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The self-sampling technique for HPV testing was as effective as the clinician-sampling technique, and both techniques were substantially correlated in detecting high-risk HPV infection. The self-sampling method appears to be highly satisfactory and may provide better compliance for the detection of cervical HPV infection.</p>","PeriodicalId":37602,"journal":{"name":"Obstetrics and Gynecology Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A comparative study of self-collected versus clinician-collected specimens in detecting high-risk HPV infection: a prospective cross-sectional study.\",\"authors\":\"Natnipa Parapob, Suree Lekawanvijit, Theera Tongsong, Kittipat Charoenkwan, Charuwan Tantipalakorn\",\"doi\":\"10.5468/ogs.24117\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The primary objective of this study was to compare the detection rate of high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) infection between self-sampling to collect vaginal specimens and clinician sampling to collect cervical specimens, as well as the correlation between the two techniques. The secondary objective was to assess satisfaction with self-sampling for HPV testing.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>From October 2021 to September 2022, women positive for HPV 16/18 and other 12 high-risk HPV genotypes and cytological ASCUS were enrolled. All participants were instructed on the method for self-collection of HPV samples. Self-collected vaginal samples and clinician-collected cervical samples were subjected to HPV DNA typing.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Paired self- and clinician-collected specimens were obtained from 104 women with positive HPV-positive results. The detection rate of high-risk HPV infection was comparable between the two techniques: 79/98 (80.6%) vs. 81/98 (82.7%) for the self-sampling and clinician-sampling techniques, respectively (McNemar's test; P=0.774). The agreement in detecting HPV infection was substantial, with a kappa coefficient of 0.75. More than 90% of the participants rated self-collection as satisfactory to very satisfactory because of its convenience and safety. Regarding methods of further follow-up, 51% of the participants chose self-sampling, whereas the remaining participants preferred collection by clinicians. No intervention-related complications were observed.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The self-sampling technique for HPV testing was as effective as the clinician-sampling technique, and both techniques were substantially correlated in detecting high-risk HPV infection. The self-sampling method appears to be highly satisfactory and may provide better compliance for the detection of cervical HPV infection.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":37602,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Obstetrics and Gynecology Science\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Obstetrics and Gynecology Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5468/ogs.24117\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Obstetrics and Gynecology Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5468/ogs.24117","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
A comparative study of self-collected versus clinician-collected specimens in detecting high-risk HPV infection: a prospective cross-sectional study.
Objective: The primary objective of this study was to compare the detection rate of high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) infection between self-sampling to collect vaginal specimens and clinician sampling to collect cervical specimens, as well as the correlation between the two techniques. The secondary objective was to assess satisfaction with self-sampling for HPV testing.
Methods: From October 2021 to September 2022, women positive for HPV 16/18 and other 12 high-risk HPV genotypes and cytological ASCUS were enrolled. All participants were instructed on the method for self-collection of HPV samples. Self-collected vaginal samples and clinician-collected cervical samples were subjected to HPV DNA typing.
Results: Paired self- and clinician-collected specimens were obtained from 104 women with positive HPV-positive results. The detection rate of high-risk HPV infection was comparable between the two techniques: 79/98 (80.6%) vs. 81/98 (82.7%) for the self-sampling and clinician-sampling techniques, respectively (McNemar's test; P=0.774). The agreement in detecting HPV infection was substantial, with a kappa coefficient of 0.75. More than 90% of the participants rated self-collection as satisfactory to very satisfactory because of its convenience and safety. Regarding methods of further follow-up, 51% of the participants chose self-sampling, whereas the remaining participants preferred collection by clinicians. No intervention-related complications were observed.
Conclusion: The self-sampling technique for HPV testing was as effective as the clinician-sampling technique, and both techniques were substantially correlated in detecting high-risk HPV infection. The self-sampling method appears to be highly satisfactory and may provide better compliance for the detection of cervical HPV infection.
期刊介绍:
Obstetrics & Gynecology Science (NLM title: Obstet Gynecol Sci) is an international peer-review journal that published basic, translational, clinical research, and clinical practice guideline to promote women’s health and prevent obstetric and gynecologic disorders. The journal has an international editorial board and is published in English on the 15th day of every other month. Submitted manuscripts should not contain previously published material and should not be under consideration for publication elsewhere. The journal has been publishing articles since 1958. The aim of the journal is to publish original articles, reviews, case reports, short communications, letters to the editor, and video articles that have the potential to change the practices in women''s health care. The journal’s main focus is the diagnosis, treatment, prediction, and prevention of obstetric and gynecologic disorders. Because the life expectancy of Korean and Asian women is increasing, the journal''s editors are particularly interested in the health of elderly women in these population groups. The journal also publishes articles about reproductive biology, stem cell research, and artificial intelligence research for women; additionally, it provides insights into the physiology and mechanisms of obstetric and gynecologic diseases.