Nature medicine · 2023
Community-integrated self-collected HPV-based cervix screening in a low-resource rural setting: a pragmatic, cluster-randomized trial.
Рандомизированное исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАPragmatic Clinical TrialНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Gottschlich Anna, Payne Beth A, Trawin Jessica, Albert Arianne, Jeronimo Jose, Mitchell-Foster Sheona, Mithani Nadia, Namugosa Ruth, Naguti Priscilla, Pedersen Heather, Rawat Angeli, Simelela Princess Nothemba, Singer Joel, Smith Laurie W, van Niekerk Dirk, Orem Jackson, Nakisige Carolyn, Ogilvie Gina
Аннотация
Effective approaches to improve coverage of self-collected human papillomavirus (HPV)-based cervix screening (SCS) as well as attendance at treatment for HPV-positive participants are needed to inform policy on optimal integration of cervical cancer screening programs within existing infrastructure in low-resource settings. ASPIRE Mayuge was a pragmatic cluster-randomized trial in rural Mayuge district, Uganda, comparing the superiority of two recruitment implementation strategies for SCS: Door-to-Door versus Community Health Day. Villages were randomized (unblinded) to a strategy, and participants aged 25-49 years with no previous history of hysterectomy or treatment for cervical cancer or pre-cancer were eligible. Participants completed a survey and participated in SCS. The primary outcome was rate of attendance at treatment after a positive SCS. The trial randomized 31 villages and 2,019 participants included in these analyses (Door-to-Door: 16 clusters, 1,055 participants; Community Health Day: 15 clusters, 964 participants). Among HPV-positive participants, attendance at treatment rates were 75% (Door-to-Door) and 67% (Community Health Day) (P = 0.049). Participants in the Community Health Day intervention were less likely to attend treatment compared to Door-to-Door (risk ratio = 0.78, 95% confidence interval: 0.64-0.96). No adverse events were reported. Policymakers in low-resource settings can use these results to guide implementation of SCS programs. ISRCTN registration: 12767014 . ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT04000503 .