MacLaughlin, Kathy L.

Objectives: We evaluated agreement between human papillomavirus (HPV) tests performed on self-collected vaginal and clinician-collected cervical specimens to advance HPV self-collection as a cervical cancer screening option in our health care system. Methods: This diagnostic accuracy study was conducted at an academic medical center. Participants were 25–65 years old with upcoming colposcopy appointments. One cohort (n = 79) self-collected a vaginal specimen in the clinic immediately before a clinician-collected cervical specimen. The second cohort (n = 115) self-collected a vaginal specimen at home, mailed it in, and had a clinician-collected cervical specimen in the clinic. Paired specimens were evaluated for total (TPA), positive (PPA), and negative (NPA) percentage agreement. Extreme temperature stability studies were also conducted. Results: Compared with clinician-collected cervical specimens, in-clinic self-collected vaginal specimens showed a TPA, PPA, and NPA of 98%, 100%, and 97% for HPV16; 99%, 100%, and 99% for HPV18; 86%, 94%, and 79% for high-risk other (HRO) HPV. The TPA, PPA, and NPA for at-home self-collected vaginal specimens compared with clinician-collected cervical specimens were 94%, 79%, and 96% for HPV16; 95%, 43%, and 98% for HPV18; 89%, 80%, and 93% for HRO. Vaginal specimens showed prolonged stability and were unaffected by extreme temperatures. Conclusions: In general, in-clinic and at-home self-collected vaginal HPV specimens for HPV screening demonstrate high agreement with clinician-collected cervical specimens, with the exception of low PPA in the at-home self-collected vaginal HPV18 subgroup. Our findings support the use of HPV self-collection as a practical option to expand access to cervical cancer screening.

Introduction/Objective: As fewer physicians enter primary care, Advanced Practice Providers (APPs) play an increasingly important role in meeting the demand for patient care. Factors contributing to work status changes among primary care APPs are not well studied. We aimed to evaluate differences in primary care APP work status across electronic health record (EHR) workload measures. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study within a Midwestern healthcare system from 2020 to 2022, evaluating the relationship between primary care APP work status defined as retention at current full-time equivalent (FTE), reduction of FTE within primary care, or relocation outside of primary care and 3 time-based EHR workload metrics. Descriptive statistics, univariate, and multivariable analyses were reported. Results: There were no differences between work status (retained, reduced, or relocated) across the EHR workload measurements of in-basket time per appointment, system time per appointment and note time per appointment ( P > .05) on univariate analysis. With multivariable analysis, there was no difference in likelihood of combined relocation/reduction adjusting for EHR workload variables ( P > .05). Conclusion: The EHR workload was not associated with work status changes for primary care APPs in our study. Further exploration is needed to identify factors that may contribute to reduction in primary care APP workforce capacity.

This economic evaluation estimates the implementation costs and cost per additional patient receiving the vaccine associated with each of the intervention strategies for increasing rates of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination in primary care practices.

Objectives Guidelines advise repeat screening within four months if Papanicolaou (Pap) results are unsatisfactory for evaluation. This utilizes healthcare system resources and may decrease patient satisfaction due to needing a second clinic appointment. We assessed unsatisfactory Pap test (UPT) rates and associations with clinician and patient characteristics to inform future interventions to decrease UPTs. Setting Multisite midwestern United States primary care practice. Methods Retrospective analysis of women aged 21–65 with a Pap between 7/1/2021 and 6/30/2023. Bivariate and multivariable logistic regression analyses were conducted to assess for associations between UPTs and clinician gender, degree, residency status, and experience. Results Of 51,195 Paps completed, 2.3% were unsatisfactory. Female clinicians performed the most Pap tests (83.2%) with slightly less likelihood of UPTs compared with male clinicians ( p = 0.015). There was no significant difference comparing physicians to advanced practice providers in UPTs ( p = 0.18). Residency training level did not affect UPT rates ( p = 0.95). Clinician experience was associated with higher UPT rates in first and fourth quartiles (least and most Paps performed) compared to middle two quartiles ( p = 0.004). UPTs were more likely among women aged > 50 years old ( p < 0.001), married ( p < 0.001), and Asian ( p < 0.001). Conclusions Clinician characteristics played a small role in predicting UPTs but patient age may be the factor most amenable to intervention to lower UPTs. Transitioning to primary human papillomavirus (HPV) screening in peri/post-menopausal women could decrease UPTs given Paps are performed on the clinician-collected cervical specimen only if HPV testing is positive.

Background: Cervical cancer screening with a self-collected vaginal specimen for human papillomavirus (HPV) testing was approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in May 2024, offering a potential solution to declining screening rates. Objective: We aimed to assess acceptability of clinic-based vaginal specimen self-collection for HPV testing and to evaluate associations between participants’ sociodemographics and their likelihood of choosing self-collection for future screening and the overall acceptability of using the Evalyn® brush device. We also evaluated associations between specific acceptability constructs and reported likelihood to use the device in the future and overall acceptability. Methods: Following self-collection of a vaginal specimen, participants completed an electronic survey that measured constructs from the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability. Associations were assessed using logistic regressions. The study was conducted at a colposcopy clinic in the Gynecology department of a midwestern academic medical center in the United States from November 2022 through July 2023. Results: Participants ( n = 81) reported high likelihood (98% likely or very likely) of choosing in-home self-collection for future screening and unanimity on overall acceptability (100% acceptable or completely acceptable) of using the device. More affirmative responses to measures on instruction understandability, ease of device use, understanding the device is used for cervical cancer screening, and perceiving self-collection improves screening rates were associated with a higher likelihood to choose self-collection for future screenings and overall acceptability of the device (all p values <0.05). Conclusion: Vaginal specimen self-collection for HPV testing was well-received in the studied population, with high acceptability and likelihood of uptake. Implementation efforts should provide user-friendly instructions and emphasize the benefits of self-collection for cervical cancer screening, particularly among people less likely to engage with clinician-collected speculum-based screening.

Objective The purpose of this review was to examine new evidence since the authors' 2019 guidelines for cervical cancer (CC) screening in non-HIV immunocompromised persons and to provide updated recommendations based on literature review and expert opinion. In addition, human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine efficacy in these populations was reviewed. Methods A literature search was performed similar to the authors' previous publication but was conducted through March 2023. Risk of CC, squamous intraepithelial lesions, and HPV infection in those living with solid organ transplant (SOT), end-stage renal disease (ESRD), hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT), and autoimmune diseases (AID), specifically systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), rheumatoid arthritis (RA), and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) with addition of multiple sclerosis (MS) were researched. This update also summarizes data available on newer disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) including monoclonal antibodies (MABs). The authors then made recommendations for HPV vaccine administration, and screening using either general population guidelines or increased surveillance, the latter based on following current recommendations for women living with HIV. Additionally, the literature search included antibody response to HPV vaccines and recommendations for their administration for these same conditions. Results Based on the reviewed risks, evidence continued to support those persons living with SOT, ESRD, HSCT, and SLE, whether on immunosuppressant therapy or not, had an increased risk of HPV, squamous intraepithelial lesions, and CC whereas there was weak evidence that those persons with IBD, RA, and MS not on immunosuppressants were at risk. Data on persons using DMT/MAB were conflicting. Data showed that patients on certain immunosuppressants had lower antibody titers following HPV vaccination. There were no studies on HPV vaccine efficacy. Conclusions Following US Center for Disease Control and Prevention HIV Cervical cancer screening (CCS) guidelines is recommended for the following: SOT, ESRD, HSCT, and SLE whether on immunosuppressants or not, and IBD, RA, and MS on immunosuppressants. Shared decision-making about increased surveillance for IBD and RA not on immunosuppressants and persons on any DMT or MAB is reasonable based on conflicting data. Human papillomavirus vaccination should not change the recommendations for increased CC surveillance. A 3-dose series of the HPV vaccine is recommended for all age-eligible patients starting at 9 years of age, with catch-up to 26 years of age. Vaccination from age 27 up to age 45 years per Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices guidelines should be considered in shared decision-making. When possible, HPV vaccine series should be initiated and completed before SOT or initiation of DMT/MAB. For HSCT, the vaccine series should be readministered along with other childhood vaccines.

Abstract Objectives The aims of the study were to identify conditions diagnosed in at least 10% of midlife women living in the US upper midwest and to assess prevalence by age, race, ethnicity, and sociodemographic status. Methods The Rochester Epidemiology Project was used to conduct a cross-sectional prevalence study of 86,946 women between 40 and 59 years residing in a 27-county region of the United States on January 1, 2020. Diagnostic billing codes were extracted and grouped into broader condition categories using the Clinical Classification System Refined. The prevalence of 424 conditions was calculated by age, race, ethnicity, and area deprivation index quartiles. Logistic regression was used to examine associations between participant characteristics and conditions that affected 10% or more of the study population. Results Twenty-eight conditions affected ≥10% of women, and eight conditions increased by ≥45% between the ages of 40 and 59 (disorders of lipid metabolism, hypertension, sleep/wake disorders, thyroid disorders, esophageal disorders, osteoarthritis, tendon and synovial disorders, and menopausal disorders; all test for trend P < 0.01). Black women had a significantly higher prevalence of hypertension and esophageal disorders at all ages (adjusted P values <0.05). Women living in more deprived areas had a significantly higher prevalence of hyperlipidemia, hypertension, sleep/wake disorders, and esophageal disorders (adjusted P values <0.05). Women living in less deprived areas had a significantly higher prevalence of thyroid disorders at age 40 to 44 and menopausal disorders at ages 50 to 59 (adjusted P values <0.05). Conclusions These data suggest that additional attention should focus on Black women and women with a lower socioeconomic status to ensure that common midlife conditions are diagnosed and treated.

Objectives Primary human papillomavirus (HPV) testing by clinician-collection is endorsed by U.S. guideline organizations for cervical cancer screening, but uptake remains low and insights into patients’ understanding are limited. This study aims to primarily address patient awareness of primary HPV screening by clinician-collection and acceptance of primary HPV screening by clinician- and self-collection, and secondarily assess factors associated with awareness and acceptance. Setting Primary care practices affiliated with an academic medical center. Methods A cross-sectional survey study of screening-eligible women aged 30–65 years was conducted to assess awareness and acceptability of primary HPV screening. We analyzed bivariate associations of respondent characteristics with awareness of primary HPV screening by clinician-collection, willingness to have clinician- or self-collected primary HPV testing, and reasons for self-collection preference. Results Respondents (n = 351; response rate = 23.4%) reported cervical cancer screening adherence of 82.8% but awareness of clinician-collected primary HPV as an option was low (18.9%) and only associated with HPV testing with recent screening ( p = 0.003). After reviewing a description of primary HPV screening, willingness for clinician-collected (81.8%) or home self-collected (76.1%) HPV testing was high, if recommended by a provider. Acceptability of clinician-collected HPV testing was associated with higher income ( p = 0.009) and for self-collection was associated with higher income ( p = 0.002) and higher education ( p = 0.02). Higher education was associated with reporting self-collection as easier than clinic-collection ( p = 0.02). Women expected self-collection to be more convenient (94%), less embarrassing (85%), easier (85%), and less painful (81%) than clinician-collection. Conclusions Educational interventions are needed to address low awareness about the current clinician-collected primary HPV screening option and to prepare for anticipated federal licensure of self-collection kits. Informing women about self-collection allows them to recognize benefits which could address screening barriers.

Introduction/Objectives: Despite U.S. Preventive Services Task Force and American Cancer Society endorsement of primary HPV screening, limited published data shows low uptake. Primary Aim: Assess cervical cancer screening rates over time, particularly primary HPV test uptake, among patients in a midwestern practice. Secondary Aim: Evaluate associations between sociodemographics and screening adherence. Methods: Cross-sectional study. Qualifying subjects and type of screening test used were identified by applying ICD-9, ICD-10, lab test, and CPT codes to the Unified Data Platform. Sociodemographics were found through the electronic health record. Results: Primary HPV uptake represented <1% of annual screening from 1/2017 to 1/2022. On 1/1/2022, only 55% of 21 to 29 year old and 63% of 30 to 65 year old were up to date with screening among the studied population. For 21 to 29 year old, compared with White women, Black women were 28% less likely to be screened [RR = 0.72 (0.66-0.79)]. Compared with never-smokers, current smokers were 9% less likely to be screened [RR = 0.91 (0.87-0.96)], past smokers were 14% more likely [RR = 1.14 (1.09-1.2)]. Among 30 to 65 year old, compared with White women, Black women were 14% less likely to be screened [RR = 0.86 (0.81-0.9)]. Compared with never-smokers, current smokers were 21% less likely to be screened [RR = 0.79 (0.77-0.81)], past smokers were 6% less likely [RR = 0.94 (0.92-0.95)]. Jointly considering race, ethnicity, smoking status, Charlson score, and rurality, findings were similar for 21 to 29 year old; Black women were screened less than White women [RR = 0.73 (0.67-0.79)]; current smokers [RR = 0.9 (0.85-0.94)] and past smokers [RR = 1.12 (1.06-1.17)] were screened less than never smokers. For 30 to 65 year old, Black women were screened less than White women [RR = 0.83 (0.79-0.88)]; current smokers [RR = 0.8 (0.78-0.81)] and past smokers [RR = 0.95 (0.93-0.96)] were screened less than never smokers. Conclusions: Screening rates remained below the Healthy People 2030 goal of 79.2% over time, particularly for younger Black women and current smokers, with minimal use of primary HPV screening.

Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03501992