Acceptability of Self-Sampling HPV Testing Among Thai Women for Cervical Cancer Screening

  • Oranratanaphan, Shina (Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital, Chulalongkorn University) ;
  • Termrungruanglert, Wichai (Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital, Chulalongkorn University) ;
  • Khemapech, Nipon (Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital, Chulalongkorn University)
  • 발행 : 2014.09.15


Background: Acceptability of self-sampling HPV testing is confirmed worldwide. However, some cultural differences may affect this question. Therefore, this study was conducted to evaluate the acceptability of self-sampling HPV testing in Thai women. Materials and Methods: One hundred women aged 30-65 years with an intact cervix were included in this study. The participants were asked to do the Pap test by physicians and then brush type self-sampling instruments were assigned for self-collection and finally completed a questionnaire for acceptability evaluation. The questionnaire contains 2 parts. Part one covered general information of the participants and part two is the acceptability questions. Results: Mean age was 40.6 years. The incidence of high risk HPV detection in this study was 16%. The most common reason for doing Pap smear was for annual checkup. On the topic of ease of use, 85 % of the subjects agreed. Most of the participants (82%) reported that they felt less pain. However, reliability of the result was not satisfactory because 37% of the participants hesitated to rely on the results of the test. According to the price, if the price is less than 1,000 Baht (32.59 Baht = 1USD), 82% of the subjects would use it for their next screening. Conclusions: The acceptability of self-sampling device in this study is quite good but the reliability of the test was questioned by some of the participants. Moreover, the price of the test in Thailand may also influence the acceptability of the test.


Self sampling;HPV testing;acceptability;secondary prevention;pap smear;cervical cancer


  1. Anhang R, Nelson JA, Telerant R, Chiasson MA, Wright TC Jr, (2005). Acceptability of self-collection of specimens for HPV DNA testing in an urban population. J Womens Health (Larchmt), 14, 721-8.
  2. Arriba LN, Enerson CL, Belinson S, Novick L, Belinson J, (2010). Mexican Cervical Cancer Screening Study II: acceptability of human papillomavirus self-sampler. Int J Gynecol Cancer, 20, 1415-23.
  3. Bais AG, van Kemenade FJ, Berkhof J, et al (2007). Human papillomavirus testing on self-sampled cervicovaginal brushes: an effective alternative to protect nonresponders in cervical screening programs. Int J Cancer, 120, 1505-10.
  4. Berner A, Hassel SB, Tebeu PM, et al (2013). Human papillomavirus self-sampling in Cameroon: women's uncertainties over the reliability of the method are barriers to acceptance. J Low Genit Tract Dis, 17, 235-41.
  5. Bruni L, Diaz M, Castellsague X, Ferrer E, Bosch FX, de Sanjose S, (2010). Cervical human papillomavirus prevalence in 5 continents: meta-analysis of 1 million women with normal cytological findings. J Infect Dis, 202, 1789-99.
  6. Bundhamcharoen K, Teerawattananon Y, Vos T, et al, (2002). Burden of disease and injuries in Thailand, priority setting for policy. Nonthaburi: Bureau of Health Policy and Planning, Ministry of Public Health.
  7. Dijkstra MG, Heideman DA, van Kemenade FJ, et al (2012). Brush-based self-sampling in combination with GP5+/6${\pm}$PCR-based hrHPV testing: high concordance with physician-taken cervical scrapes for HPV genotyping and detection of high-grade CIN. J Clin Virol, 54, 147-51.
  8. Dzuba IG, Diaz EY, Allen B, et al (2002). The acceptability of self-collected samples for HPV testing vs. the Pap test as alternatives in cervical cancer screening. J Womens Health Gend Based Med, 11, 265-75.
  9. Ferlay J, Shin HR, Bray F, et al (2010). GLOBOCAN 2008:Cancer Incidence and Mortality Worldwide: IARC Cancer Base No. 10. Published 2010.
  10. Forrest S, McCaffery K, Waller J, et al (2004). Attitudes to self-sampling for HPV among Indian, Pakistani, African- Caribbean and white British women in Manchester, UK. J Med Screen, 11, 85-8.
  11. IARC monographs on the evaluation of carcinogenic risks to humans. Lyon: International Agency for Research on Cancer, 2005
  12. Kececiglu M, Seckin B, Baser E, et al (2013). Cost and effectiveness comparison of immediate colposcopy versus human papillomavirus DNA testing in management of aypical squamous cells of undermined significance in Turkish women. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev, 14, 511-4.
  13. Lindell M, Sanner K, Wikstrom I, Wilander E (2012). Self-sampling of vaginal fluid and high-risk human papillomavirus testing in women aged 50 years or older not attending Papanicolaou smear screening. BJOG, 119, 245-8.
  14. Ministry of Public Health (2008). The Survey Report of Behavioural Risk Factors of Noncommunicable Diseases and Injuries in Thailand, 2005. Nonthaburi: MOPH; 2008.
  15. Ngan HY, Garland SM, Bhatla N, et al (2011). Asia oceania guidelines for the implementation of programs for cervical cancer prevention and control. J Cancer Epidemiol, 2011, 794861.
  16. Oranratanaphan S, Amatyakul P, Iramaneerat K, Srithipayawan S (2010). Knowledge, attitudes and practices about the Pap smear among medical workers in Naresuan University Hospital, Thailand. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev, 11, 1727-30.
  17. Pandey S, Mishra L, Chandrawati (2012). Human papillomavirus screening in North India women. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev, 13, 2643-6.
  18. Sahin MK, Sahim G, Dikici MF, Igde FA, Yaris F (2014). Women's perceptions and atitudes about cervical cancer in Turkey: Kato's device as an alternative to Pap smear. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev, 15, 905-10.
  19. Schiffman M, Kjaer SK (2003). Natural history of anogenital human papillomavirus infection and neoplasia. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr, 31, 14-9.
  20. Snijders PJ, Verhoef VM, Arbyn M, et al (2013). High-risk HPV testing on self-sampled versus clinician-collected specimens: A review on the clinical accuracy and impact on population attendance in cervical cancer screening. Int J Cancer, 132, 2223-36.
  21. Sriamporn S, Khuhaprema T, Parkin M (2006). Cervical cancer screening in Thailand: an overview. J Med Screen, 13, 39-43.
  22. Stenvall H, Wikstrom I, Backlund I, Wilander E (2007). Accuracy of HPV testing of vaginal smear obtained with a novel self-sampling device. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand, 86, 16-21.
  23. Szarewski A, Cadman L, Ashdown-Barr L, Waller J(2009). Exploring the acceptability of two self-sampling devices for human papillomavirus testing in the cervical screening context: a qualitative study of Muslim women in London. J Med Screen, 16, 193-8.
  24. Szarewski A, Cadman L, Mallett S (2007). Human papillomavirus testing by self-sampling: assessment of accuracy in an unsupervised clinical setting. J Med Screen, 14, 34-42.
  25. Tamalet C, Le Retraite L, Leandri FX, et al (2013). Vaginal self-sampling is an adequate means of screening HR-HPV types in women not participating in regular cervical cancer screening. Clin Microbiol Infect, 19, 44-50.
  26. Thurston WE, Scott CM (2005). Barriers to screening: A critical review of the literature (1990-1995). Ottawa, ON: Health Canada.
  27. van Baars R, Bosgraaf RP, ter Harmsel BW, et al (2012). Dry storage and transport of a cervicovaginal self-sample by use of the Evalyn Brush, providing reliable human papillomavirus detection combined with comfort for women. J Clin Microbiol, 50, 3937-43.
  28. Virtanen A, Anttila A, Luostarinen T, Nieminen P (2011). Selfsampling versus reminder letter: effects on cervical cancer screening attendance and coverage in Finland. Int J Cancer, 128, 2681-7.
  29. Virtanen A, Nieminen P, Luostarinen T, Anttila A (2011). Selfsample HPV tests as an intervention for nonattendees of cervical cancer screening in Finland: a randomized trial. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev, 20, 1960-9.
  30. WHO (2006). Comprehensive Cervical Cancer Control: A Guide to Essential Practice. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization.
  31. Working group of Burden of Disease Project. Burden of disease and injuries in Thailand, 2004 (interim report). Nonthaburi: International Health Policy Program, Ministry of Public Health, 2007.
  32. Zhang L, Lin Y, Li JK (2014). Concordance in cervical HPV detection between Hybrid Capture 2 and HPV GenoArray tests. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev, 15, 4465-6.

피인용 문헌

  1. Comparison of Detection Sensitivity for Human Papillomavirus between Self-collected Vaginal Swabs and Physician-collected Cervical Swabs by Electrochemical DNA Chip vol.15, pp.24, 2015,
  2. Womenʼs Attitudes Toward Cervicovaginal Self-Sampling for High-Risk HPV Infection on the US-Mexico Border vol.19, pp.4, 2015,
  3. HPV self-sampling in Japanese women: A feasibility study in a population with limited experience of tampon use vol.23, pp.3, 2016,
  4. Assessing Acceptability of Self-Sampling Kits, Prevalence, and Risk Factors for Human Papillomavirus Infection in American Indian Women vol.41, pp.5, 2016,
  5. Acceptability of Self-Sample Human Papillomavirus Testing Among Thai Women Visiting a Colposcopy Clinic vol.43, pp.3, 2018,