HPV testing versus repeat Pap testing for the management of a minor abnormal Pap smear: Evaluation of a decision aid to support informed choice

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2008.07.021Get rights and content

Abstract

Objective

To examine women's informed preference for the management of a mildly abnormal Pap smear and the impact of a decision aid.

Methods

Women (n = 106) were given a choice of management supported by a decision aid and surveyed before, and after decision making to evaluate predictors of choice and decision aid impact.

Results

HPV triage was preferred by most women (65%) although a substantial minority selected repeat Pap testing (35%). Women who chose HPV triage were more likely to have had children, have had a previous abnormal Pap smear and were more distressed than women who chose a repeat Pap test. In total, 68% of women made an informed choice. Rapid timing of follow-up was important for women choosing HPV testing. The lower chance of colposcopy and greater opportunity for regression, were rated as important by women choosing Pap testing. Decisional conflict was lower among women who chose HPV triage. No other differences in short-term psychological outcomes were found.

Conclusion

The decision aid supported informed choice among the majority of women. Women tailored their choice to their practical, health and psychological needs.

Practice implications

Offering women an informed choice for a mildly abnormal Pap smear may enable women to select the management that best suits their circumstances.

Introduction

The management of minor cervical abnormalities (borderline smears, atypical cells of undetermined significance ASCUS, possible LSIL) remains contentious and difficult for clinicians and women. There are two main approaches to management available, repeat Pap testing or Human papillomavirus (HPV) testing. We designed and evaluated a patient decision aid to support an evidence-based informed choice between the two options for women with a minor abnormal Pap smear.

Minor abnormalities on Pap smear are common with over 100,000 women affected annually in Australia [1], a similar number in England [2], and approximately 3 million women affected each year in the US. Although the vast majority of cases are clinically insignificant, 5–10% [3] represent a more serious abnormality (CIN2+) that may benefit from treatment [4], [5]. The two principal management approaches involve: (i) follow-up by repeat Pap tests at 6–12 monthly intervals with referral to colposcopy if more serious abnormalities are found. This strategy is currently adopted in the UK and Australian screening programmes [6], [7], [8] and shown to be highly effective [4]. (ii) The new alternate management is Human Papillomavirus (HPV) testing (Digene Hybrid Capture II) which checks for the presence of high-risk types of HPV associated with cervix cancer. It is now recommended practice for women with ASCUS in the US [5], [6] and is being considered for inclusion in the UK and Australian cervical screening programmes. HPV testing is also offered privately or reimbursed through health funds in several countries worldwide. Women who test positive for HPV are referred for colposcopy examination and those testing negative are recalled for a repeat Pap smear at 12 months [5].

In a previous paper we compared evidence on the health and psychological outcomes of each management strategy [6] to inform a patient decision aid. We determined that both HPV testing and repeat Pap smear testing are highly effective at preventing serious cervical abnormalities and cancer [4], [7], [8]. However, the tests hold different advantages and disadvantages for women practically and psychologically (as summarised in Fig. 1).

The advantages of HPV testing are that the test can be done immediately after an abnormal result (as an additional test or by reflex testing if the original Pap smear used liquid based cytology). Women are referred directly for further examination if they test positive, or a repeat Pap smear at an extended interval if they test negative. Immediate testing may have practical and psychological benefits for women and there is evidence that some women prefer a more rapid follow-up and resolution of their abnormality [7]. In contrast, management by repeat Pap testing is a long process of repeat tests until 2 or 3 consecutive Pap smears are normal (in Australia and UK, respectively). Waiting for repeat testing and uncertainty about whether the abnormality will clear or worsen can result in raised levels of anxiety which remain until the abnormality has resolved [15], [16].

The disadvantages of HPV triage are that it may increase the distress experienced by women with an abnormal Pap smear; first through the increased referral of women to colposcopy [8], [9] and the detection and treatment of cytological lesions which may regress naturally if left [10]. Both colposcopy and treatment are associated with increased anxiety among women [11]. Second, distress may be increased through the explicit diagnosis of HPV. Women have been shown to be concerned and confused about the sexually transmitted nature of HPV following a positive test result, albeit a very common infection. This appears to contribute additional psychosocial burden to an already stressful experience [12], [13], [14].

The balance of benefits and harms of each management strategy inevitably varies between women. For some women the advantages of immediate testing offered by HPV triage will outweigh the disadvantages whereas for others the reverse holds. In this paper we investigate which management option women preferred when offered an evidenced based informed choice and the socio-demographic, health, and psychological factors associated with choice of management. We examined the impact of the decision aid and choice on women's short-term psychological wellbeing.

Section snippets

Participants

Participants were women aged 16–70 years who were attending routine cervical screening at Family Planning clinics across Australia. All women had received a minor abnormal Pap smear result, categorised according to the Australian terminology current at that time, as non-specific minor changes (NSMCs) with or without HPV effect (koilocytosis).1

Results

A total of 106 women were randomised to receive the decision aid. Of these, 94 women (89%) made a management choice by returning their preference form. Ninety-one (91/106, 86%) women returned a baseline questionnaire and slightly fewer women (n = (81/106), 76%) a completed follow-up questionnaire (the decision evaluation questionnaire). Twelve of the total 106 women did not make a choice. Of these 1 withdrew from the study, 2 completed a baseline questionnaire but nothing further and the

Discussion

The study examined the effect of a decision aid to support an informed choice for the management of a minor abnormal Pap smear result. It is the first study to examine informed preferences among women facing the management decision. Over two-thirds of women made an informed choice and 65% of women chose HPV triage testing. We expected that preferences for HPV testing would in fact be higher since it is a new test which might be perceived as better by virtue of it being more recently developed.

Conflict of interest

None.

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank FPA Health (NSW), Illawarra Women's Health Centre (NSW), Family Planning Queensland (FPQ), Family Planning ACT, SHINE (South Australia) and Family Planning WA (FPWA) for their assistance with the recruitment and testing of IMAP study participants. In particular we are grateful to Julie Cayley, Ruth Terwijn, Julie Adrian, Shane Jasiak, Ann Hutchings, Pauline Lee, Wendy Jarrett, Marilyn Grey, Lynn Wray, Caroline Harvey, Sally Page, Jacqui McLelland, Sonya Melgram, Jody

References (32)

  • Triage Study ASCUS-LSIL (ALTS Group)

    Results of a randomized trial on the management of cytology interpretations of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance

    Am J Obstet Gynecol

    (2003)
  • S. Moss

    Effect of testing for human papillomavirus as a triage during screening for cervical cancer: observational before and after study

    Brit Med J

    (2006)
  • E. Maissi

    Psychological impact of human papillomavirus testing in women with borderline or mildly dyskaryotic cervical smear test results: cross sectional questionnaire study

    Brit Med J

    (2004)
  • K. McCaffery et al.

    Testing positive for Human Papillomavirus in routine cervical screening: examination of psychosocial impact

    BJOG

    (2004)
  • K.J. McCaffery

    Social and psychological impact of HPV testing in cervical screening: a qualitative study

    Sex Transm Infect

    (2006)
  • National Health and Medical Research Council. Screening to prevent cervical cancer: guidelines for the management of...
  • Cited by (0)

    View full text