Cross-sectional survey assesses sample takers’ opinions on HPV self-sampling in cervical screening, suggesting support but highlighting concerns.
ObjectivesSelf-sampling for human papillomavirus (HPV) is being considered as an additional cervical screening method in Ireland. As sample takers play a central role in cervical screening and their support would be essential to the successful delivery of any HPV self-sampling programme, this survey aimed to assess sample takers' views on HPV self-sampling.MethodsAn anonymous, online survey of HPV sample takers registered with CervicalCheck was conducted. Survey questions focused on sample takers' views on the introduction of HPV self-sampling in Ireland, advantages and disadvantages for them and the role sample takers might play in delivering self-sampling.ResultsOf the 200 sample takers who completed the survey, 175 (87.5%) were nurses and the remainder doctors. Two-thirds (67%, 95% confidence interval: 60.5-73.5%; n = 134) supported introducing HPV self-sampling, 9% (5.0-13.0%; n = 18) did not, and 24% (18.1-29.9%; n = 48) were unsure. The reasons respondents supported introducing HPV self-sampling included a potential to increase screening uptake and provide a better experience for participants. Those opposed were concerned self-sampling would represent a missed opportunity for clinical examination of the cervix, to counsel patients about screening, and discuss other health concerns, while a minority reported concerns about the accuracy of self-sampled tests. No clear differences in views were observed by professional role.ConclusionsMost respondents supported HPV self-sampling as an additional cervical screening method, but some were concerned about the potential reduction in important clinical encounters and accuracy of self-sampled tests. The benefits and limitations of HPV self-sampling should be carefully considered before introducing any self-sampling programme in Ireland.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
White et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: