Sara Smith

Abstract Objective To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) assays on self samples and the efficacy of self sampling strategies to reach underscreened women. Design Updated meta-analysis. Data sources Medline (PubMed), Embase, and CENTRAL from 1 January 2013 to 15 April 2018 (accuracy review), and 1 January 2014 to 15 April 2018 (participation review). Review methods Accuracy review: hrHPV assay on a vaginal self sample and a clinician sample; and verification of the presence of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse (CIN2+) by colposcopy and biopsy in all enrolled women or in women with positive tests. Participation review: study population included women who were irregularly or never screened; women in the self sampling arm (intervention arm) were invited to collect a self sample for hrHPV testing; women in the control arm were invited or reminded to undergo a screening test on a clinician sample; participation in both arms was documented; and a population minimum of 400 women. Results 56 accuracy studies and 25 participation trials were included. hrHPV assays based on polymerase chain reaction were as sensitive on self samples as on clinician samples to detect CIN2+ or CIN3+ (pooled ratio 0.99, 95% confidence interval 0.97 to 1.02). However, hrHPV assays based on signal amplification were less sensitive on self samples (pooled ratio 0.85, 95% confidence interval 0.80 to 0.89). The specificity to exclude CIN2+ was 2% or 4% lower on self samples than on clinician samples, for hrHPV assays based on polymerase chain reaction or signal amplification, respectively. Mailing self sample kits to the woman’s home address generated higher response rates to have a sample taken by a clinician than invitation or reminder letters (pooled relative participation in intention-to-treat-analysis of 2.33, 95% confidence interval 1.86 to 2.91). Opt-in strategies where women had to request a self sampling kit were generally not more effective than invitation letters (relative participation of 1.22, 95% confidence interval 0.93 to 1.61). Direct offer of self sampling devices to women in communities that were underscreened generated high participation rates (>75%). Substantial interstudy heterogeneity was noted (I 2 >95%). Conclusions When used with hrHPV assays based on polymerase chain reaction, testing on self samples was similarly accurate as on clinician samples. Offering self sampling kits generally is more effective in reaching underscreened women than sending invitations. However, since response rates are highly variable among settings, pilots should be set up before regional or national roll out of self sampling strategies.

Pharmacies have been endorsed as alternative vaccine delivery sites to improve vaccination rates through increased access to services. Our objective was to identify challenges and facilitators to adolescent and adult vaccination provision in pharmacy settings in the United States. We recruited 40 licensed pharmacists in states with different pharmacy vaccination laws. Eligible pharmacists previously administered or were currently administering human papillomavirus (HPV); tetanus, diphtheria, and pertussis (TDAP); or meningitis (meningococcal conjugate vaccine [MCV4]) vaccines to adolescents aged 9 to 17 years. Pharmacists participated in a semistructured survey on in-pharmacy vaccine provision. Pharmacists commonly administered vaccinations to age-eligible adolescents and adults: influenza (100%, 100%), pneumococcal (35%, 98%), TDAP (80%, 98%), MCV4 (60%, 78%), and HPV (45%, 53%). Common challenges included reimbursement/insurance coverage (28%, 78%), education of patients/parents (30%, 40%), and pharmacists' time constraints (28%, 35%). Three-quarters of pharmacists reported that vaccination rates could be increased. National efforts should expand insurance coverage for vaccine administration reimbursement and improve data information systems to optimize provision within pharmacies.

HPV vaccination coverage in the United States (US) falls short of the Healthy People 2020 goal of 80% coverage among 13-15 year-old adolescents. Pharmacies are a promising alternative vaccine delivery site that may increase access to HPV vaccination. Our objective was to assess pharmacists' insights into HPV vaccination provision to adolescents. We recruited 40 licensed pharmacists in eight states with different pharmacy vaccination laws: Alabama, California, Indiana, Kentucky, Maine, Tennessee, Texas, and Washington. Eligible pharmacists either previously provided or were currently providing HPV, tetanus-diphtheria-pertussis, or meningococcal vaccines to adolescents aged 9-17 years. Pharmacists were administered a semi-structured survey to explore insights into HPV vaccination provision. Forty-five percent of surveyed pharmacies offered HPV vaccination to adolescents. Pharmacists' reported challenges to providing HPV vaccination were parental consent (28%), tracking and patient recall (17%), perceived stigma of vaccination (17%), and education about or promotion of vaccination (17%). Pharmacists offering HPV vaccination sent patient reminders for vaccines with multiple doses (89%) and utilized telephone reminders (72%). Pharmacists informed patients' primary care providers of HPV vaccination doses most commonly through fax (72%) and updating electronic medical records (22%). One-third of pharmacists reported vaccination provision using the state immunization information system (IIS). Seventy-five percent reported vaccination rates could be increased at their respective pharmacy. Pharmacies are underutilized, although highly accessible, for HPV vaccination in the US. National efforts should expand educational programs to improve public awareness of in-pharmacy HPV vaccination, and improve the utilization of state IIS for reporting immunization coverage of adolescents by pharmacists.

To capture strategies for achieving high adolescent coverage of tetanus-diphtheria-acellular pertussis (Tdap), meningococcal conjugate (MenACWY), and human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination, we surveyed employees of 20 North Carolina (N.C.) clinics that achieved adolescent vaccination coverage higher than the state average. One employee per clinic completed a surveysummarizing clinic practices regarding adolescent vaccination; perceived barriers and facilitators to Tdap/MenACWY/HPV vaccination; and the role of "champions" who made special efforts to promote adolescent vaccination. Common perceived barriers for all vaccinations were parental opposition and logistical barriers to receiving vaccination. For HPV vaccination, employees cited parental concerns about sexual behavior and injection site pain; no school vaccination requirement; and low-perceived benefit in boys. Most clinics (80%) implemented successful changes to increase adolescent vaccination: consistently offering vaccination, tracking vaccination status using existing data, providing appointment reminders, updating providers on vaccination recommendations, and expanding vaccination hours. Strategies to improve HPV vaccination included co-administration with Tdap and MenACWY, and providing reminders to complete the vaccination series. Vaccine champions strongly recommended vaccination to parents (55%) and educated parents on vaccination recommendations (36%). Clinics in N.C.and similar settings can implement these and other low-resource strategies to overcome adolescent vaccination barriers. ABBREVIATIONS: CDC=Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; EHR=Electronic health record; HPV=Human papillomavirus; Tdap=Tetanus-diphtheria-acellular pertussis vaccine; MenACWY=Meningococcal Conjugate Vaccine; NCIB=North Carolina Immunization Branch; NCIR=North Carolina Immunization Registry; ACIP=Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices.