ReviewClinicians' attitude towards changes in Australian National Cervical Screening Program
Section snippets
Background
The Australian National Cervical Screening Program (NCSP) has enabled organized screening for cervical cancers and pre-cancers since 1991 with great success [1]. Compared to other countries with cancer registration systems, Australia now has the second lowest incidence rate of cervical cancer in the world at 9.6 per 100,000 women and one of the lowest mortalities at 2.0 per 100,000 women [2].
The advent of high-risk human papillomavirus (hr-HPV) DNA testing is anticipated to profoundly change
Objectives
This paper aims to assess the attitudes and acceptance, barriers and facilitators of affiliates of the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (RANZCOG) who are largely OGs and GP diplomats, (GPs undertaking a diploma in obstetrics and gynecology), regarding the potential new recommendations for cervical screening. Specifically, ‘willingness’ to perform HPV DNA testing every 5 years from 25 years of age was assessed. The results can help inform effective
Study design
This was a cross-sectional observational study of RANZCOG affiliates. An electronic survey (SurveyMonkey®, Palo Alto, CA, USA) with a brief cover letter was distributed to 4725 RANZCOG affiliates on 4th April 2014, with two reminders sent out 17th April and 26th May 2014. Revised cervical screening guidelines had been announced April 28th 2014 to commence in 2016 (while the survey was active). The survey closed on 13th June 2014.
Potential participants included all RANZCOG fellows, members,
Data analysis
Analysis was performed using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) (IBM SPSS Statistics Desktop V22.0, New York). The answer to the statement ‘For my patients, I would be willing to perform an HPV test to screen for cervical cancer at/after the age of 25 and every five years instead of a Pap smear every two years after onset of sexual activity, if the NHMRC or NCSP guidelines recommended’ was used to determine physicians’ willingness to adhere to potential new guidelines revisions.
Results
Of 4725 RANZCOG affiliates, 3292 (69.7%) did not respond, 467 (9.9%) had missing or undeliverable emails, 10 (0.2%) were excluded as they did not answer beyond demographic information and 956 (22.5%) clinicians responded to the survey. Demographic data is summarized in Table 1.
Of those responded, HPV DNA testing every 5 years, and HPV testing starting at 25 years were equally acceptable: 39.4% [344/874] and 37.8% [330/874] respectively, (χ2(1) = 0.47, p = 0.491). However, 526 (60.2%) reported that
Discussion
Australia introduced a publicly funded HPV vaccination program in 2007. Since then the country has seen a reduction in high grade dysplasia, genital warts and hr-HPV prevalence in young women [19], [20], [21], [22], [23]. A recent Australian cross-sectional survey showed a substantial (77%) fall in HPV16 prevalence in women aged 18–24 years in 2010–2011, compared to pre-vaccination levels [24]. Optimizing screening in the long term is likely to depend on an eventual transition to primary HPV
Conclusions
This study of RANZCOG clinicians sheds light on a practitioner’s willingness to accept new national guidelines, and explores barriers and facilitators. This study informs areas the guidelines will need to address as well as areas for further research and areas for targeted education. Introduction of the new cervical screening guidelines is now set for May 1st 2017. Good change management strategies will be critical to clinicians adopting the new guidelines, which will ensure the successful
Conflict of interest
None.
Funding
YJ has received scholarship funding from the Cancer Council Victoria, Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, and Royal Australasian Chapter of Sexual Health Medicine (Novartis Scholarship) and grant funding from the Victorian Cancer Agency and Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Network for unrelated projects. SG has received grant support from CSL Bio, Merck and GlaxoSmithKline to conduct HPV vaccine studies (VIVIANNE) trial. SG is a member of the Merck Global
Ethical approval
Approval was provided by the RANZCOG Continuing Professional Development committee, and registered with the Royal Women’s Hospital and University of Melbourne Human Research Ethics Committees.
Contributors
- (1)
Conception and design of the study: YJ, GO, SG, XL, SH, AG, JT, DW.
- (2)
Acquisition of data: XL, SH, YJ, SG, AG.
- (3)
Analysis and interpretation of data: all authors.
- (4)
Drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content: all authors.
- (5)
Final approval of the version to be submitted: all authors.
Competing interest
None declared.
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank and acknowledge all those whose contributions were invaluable for completion of this paper, in particular the participants, the RANZCOG CPD Committee and the administrative staff at RANZCOG.
References (43)
- et al.
Efficacy of HPV-based screening for prevention of invasive cervical cancer: follow-up of four European randomised controlled trials
Lancet
(2014) - et al.
Human papillomavirus testing for the detection of high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia and cancer: final results of the POBASCAM randomised controlled trial
Lancet Oncol.
(2012) - et al.
Challenges in cervical cancer prevention: a survey of U.S. obstetrician-gynecologists
Am. J. Prev. Med.
(2013) - et al.
From best evidence to best practice: effective implementation of change in patients’ care
Lancet
(2003) - et al.
Physicians’ intentions to change Pap smear frequency following human papillomavirus vaccination
J. Pediatr. Adolesc. Gynecol.
(2012) - et al.
Early effect of the HPV vaccination programme on cervical abnormalities in Victoria, Australia: an ecological study
Lancet
(2011) - et al.
Estimates of the timing of reductions in genital warts and high grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia after onset of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination in the United States
Vaccine
(2013) - et al.
Assessing genital human papillomavirus genoprevalence in young Australian women following the introduction of a national vaccination program
Vaccine
(2015) - et al.
Adherence to practice guidelines: the role of specialty society guidelines
Am. Heart J.
(2003) - et al.
Attitudes and knowledge of Georgian physicians regarding cervical cancer prevention, 2010
Int. J. Gynaecol. Obstet.
(2013)
Obstetric outcomes after conservative treatment for intraepithelial or early invasive cervical lesions: systematic review and meta-analysis
Lancet
Cervical Screening in Australia 2011–2012
Overview of the European and North American studies on HPV testing in primary cervical cancer screening
Int. J. Cancer
Differences among primary care physicians’ adherence to 2009 ACOG guidelines for cervical cancer screening
J. Womens Health (Larchmt)
Physician characteristics and the reported effect of evidence-based practice guidelines
Health Serv. Res.
Why don’t physicians adhere to guideline recommendations in practice? An analysis of barriers among Dutch general practitioners
Implement. Sci.
Achieving health gain through clinical guidelines II: ensuring guidelines change medical practice
Qual. Health Care
Physician recommendation for papanicolaou testing among U.S. women, 2000
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomark. Prev.
Missed cancer screening opportunities among older women: a provider survey
Cancer Pract.
Cited by (10)
Awareness and attitudes towards the revised National Cervical Screening Program amongst women in rural New South Wales: a cross-sectional study
2023, Australian Journal of Primary HealthReasons that clinicians in Australia offer cervical screening outside guidelines for frequency, age and co-testing
2022, Public Health Research and PracticeRenewal of the National Cervical Screening Program: health professionals’ knowledge about screening of specific populations in NSW, Australia
2022, Public Health Research and PracticeAustralian National Cervical Screening Program renewal: Attitudes and experiences of general practitioners, and obstetricians and gynaecologists
2021, Australian and New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics and GynaecologyNational Cervical Screening Program renewal in Australia: Survey of clinician views and attitudes
2020, Australian Journal of Primary Health