International journal of behavioral medicine · 2026
The Convenience-anxiety Paradox: Carcinophobia and Screening Misconceptions in Minimally Supported Human Papillomavirus Self-sampling.
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Wongsuwan Hatchanok, Kittisiam Thannaporn, Techapoonpon Kamolvisa
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Human papillomavirus (HPV) self-sampling often involves a "minimally supported pathway," wherein women receive results through impersonal channels without prescreening counseling. This "convenience-anxiety paradox" may cause psychological distress due to a communication vacuum between the healthcare system and the patient. This study assessed the prevalence and predictors of anxiety among women who received high-risk HPV results through vaginal self-sampling.
METHODS: Seventy-two women, comprising medical professionals and university staff, were included. Anxiety was evaluated using the Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale-21. Demographic data, coping action, and knowledge regarding HPV were collected via questionnaire. Distress related to cervical dysplasia was assessed using the Cervical Dysplasia Distress Questionnaire. Factors predicting anxiety were determined using multivariate logistic regression.
RESULTS: Anxiety prevalence was 23.6% (n = 17). In multivariate analysis, the health consequences subscale was a potential predictor (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 1.60; p = 0.099). Furthermore, a statistically non-significant trend indicated that participants failing to distinguish "screening" (risk) from "diagnosis" (disease) of the test had an elevated point estimate for anxiety (aOR = 4.37; CI = 0.94-20.36; p = 0.060). Interestingly, working in medical practice did not mitigate anxiety (p = 0.412), indicating that in this sample, possessing professional health knowledge did not act as a protective factor against anxiety.
CONCLUSIONS: Anxiety in HPV self-sampling may be associated with confusion regarding screening's purpose. Because medical professionals experienced similar anxiety levels as non-medical staff, professional health knowledge may not fully buffer against the "information vacuum." These results suggest a potential systemic communication gap; to scale self-sampling ethically, notification protocols should transition from simple result delivery to health-literacy-sensitive interventions that clarify the fundamental purpose of screening.
METHODS: Seventy-two women, comprising medical professionals and university staff, were included. Anxiety was evaluated using the Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale-21. Demographic data, coping action, and knowledge regarding HPV were collected via questionnaire. Distress related to cervical dysplasia was assessed using the Cervical Dysplasia Distress Questionnaire. Factors predicting anxiety were determined using multivariate logistic regression.
RESULTS: Anxiety prevalence was 23.6% (n = 17). In multivariate analysis, the health consequences subscale was a potential predictor (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 1.60; p = 0.099). Furthermore, a statistically non-significant trend indicated that participants failing to distinguish "screening" (risk) from "diagnosis" (disease) of the test had an elevated point estimate for anxiety (aOR = 4.37; CI = 0.94-20.36; p = 0.060). Interestingly, working in medical practice did not mitigate anxiety (p = 0.412), indicating that in this sample, possessing professional health knowledge did not act as a protective factor against anxiety.
CONCLUSIONS: Anxiety in HPV self-sampling may be associated with confusion regarding screening's purpose. Because medical professionals experienced similar anxiety levels as non-medical staff, professional health knowledge may not fully buffer against the "information vacuum." These results suggest a potential systemic communication gap; to scale self-sampling ethically, notification protocols should transition from simple result delivery to health-literacy-sensitive interventions that clarify the fundamental purpose of screening.