Contraceptive Provision to Women With Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities Enrolled in Medicaid.

OBJECTIVE: To compare contraceptive provision to women with and without intellectual and developmental disabilities enrolled in North Carolina Medicaid. METHODS: Our retrospective cohort study used 2019 North Carolina Medicaid claims to identify women aged 15-44 years with and without intellectual and developmental disabilities at risk for pregnancy who were continuously enrolled during 2019 or had Family Planning Medicaid with at least one claim. We calculated the proportion in each cohort who received 1) most or moderately effective contraception, 2) long-acting reversible contraception, 3) short-acting contraception, and 4) individual methods. We classified contraceptive receipt by procedure type and disaggregated across sociodemographic characteristics. Adjusting for age, race, ethnicity, and urban or rural setting, we constructed logistic regression models to estimate most or moderately effective contraceptive provision odds by intellectual and developmental disability status and by level or type of intellectual and developmental disability. We performed subanalyses to estimate co-occurrence of provision and menstrual disorders. RESULTS: Among 9,508 women with intellectual and developmental disabilities and 299,978 without, a significantly smaller proportion with intellectual and developmental disabilities received most or moderately effective contraception (30.1% vs 36.3%, P <.001). With the exception of injectable contraception, this trend was consistent across all measures and remained statistically significant after controlling for race, ethnicity, age, and urban or rural status (adjusted odds ratio 0.75, 95% CI 0.72-0.79; P <.001). Among those who received most or moderately effective contraception, a significantly greater proportion of women with intellectual and developmental disabilities had co-occurring menstrual disorders (31.3% vs 24.3%, P <.001). CONCLUSION: These findings suggest disparities in contraceptive provision and potential differences in clinical indication by intellectual and developmental disability status. Future studies should investigate reasons for and barriers to contraceptive use among women with intellectual and developmental disabilities.

Achieving equity in cervical cancer screening in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs): Strengthening health systems using a systems thinking approach.

The World Health Organization (WHO) is leading a call to action to eliminate cervical cancer by the end of the century through global implementation of two effective evidence-based preventive interventions: HPV vaccination and cervical screening and management (CSM). Models estimate that without intervention, over the next 50 years 12.2 million new cases of cervical cancer will occur, nearly 60% of which are preventable only through CSM. Given that more than 80% of the cervical cancer occurs in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), scaling up sustainable CSM programs in these countries is a top priority for achieving the global elimination goals. Multiple technologies have been developed and validated to meet this need. Now it is critical to identify strategies to implement these technologies into complex, adaptive health care delivery systems. As part of the coordinated cervical cancer elimination effort, we applied a systems thinking lens to reflect on our experiences with implementation of HPV-based CSM programs using the WHO health systems framework. While many common health system barriers were identified, the effectiveness of implementation strategies to address them was context dependent; often reflecting differences in stakeholder's belief in the quality of the evidence supporting a CSM algorithm, the appropriateness of the evidence and algorithm to context, and the 'implementability' of the algorithm under realistic assessments of resource availability and constraints. A structured planning process, with early and broad stakeholder engagement, will ensure that shared-decisions in CSM implementation are appropriately aligned with the culture, values, and resource realities of the setting.

Comparison of the costs of HPV testing through community health campaigns versus home-based testing in rural Western Kenya: a microcosting study.

OBJECTIVES: To estimate the cost of human papillomavirus (HPV)-based screening through community health campaigns (CHCs) and home-based testing. SETTING: CHCs and home-based testing in six communities in rural Western Kenya. PARTICIPANTS: CHCs and home-based screening reached 2297 and 1002 women aged 25-65 years, respectively. OUTCOME MEASURES: Outcome measures were overall cost per woman screened achieved through the CHCs and home-based testing and the cost per woman for each activity comprising the screening intervention. RESULTS: The mean cost per woman screened through CHCs and home-based testing were similar, at $37.7 (range $26.4-$52.0) and $37.1 (range $27.6-$54.0), respectively. For CHCs, personnel represented 49% of overall cost, supplies 25%, services 5% and capital goods 23%. For home-based testing, these were: personnel 73%, supplies 25%, services 1% and capital goods 2%. A greater number of participants was associated with a lower cost per participant. CONCLUSIONS: The mean cost per woman screened is comparable for CHC and home-based testing, with differences in type of input. The CHCs generally reached more eligible women in the six communities, whereas home-based strategies more efficiently reached populations with low screening rates. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02124252.

Systems-level barriers to treatment in a cervical cancer prevention program in Kenya: Several observational studies.

OBJECTIVE: To identify health systems-level barriers to treatment for women who screened positive for high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) in a cervical cancer prevention program in Kenya. METHODS: In a trial of implementation strategies for hrHPV-based cervical cancer screening in western Kenya in 2018-2019, women underwent hrHPV testing offered through community health campaigns, and women who tested positive were referred to government health facilities for cryotherapy. The current analysis draws on treatment data from this trial, as well as two observational studies that were conducted: 1) periodic assessments of the treatment sites to ascertain availability of resources for treatment and 2) surveys with treatment providers to elicit their views on barriers to care. Bivariate analyses were performed for the site assessment data, and the provider survey data were analyzed descriptively. RESULTS: Seventeen site assessments were performed across three treatment sites. All three sites reported instances of supply stockouts, two sites reported treatment delays due to lack of supplies, and two sites reported treatment delays due to provider factors. Of the 16 providers surveyed, ten (67%) perceived lack of knowledge of HPV and cervical cancer as the main barrier in women's decision to get treated, and seven (47%) perceived financial barriers for transportation and childcare as the main barrier to accessing treatment. Eight (50%) endorsed that providing treatment free of cost was the greatest facilitator of treatment. CONCLUSION: Patient education and financial support to reach treatment are potential areas for intervention to increase rates of hrHPV+ women presenting for treatment. It is also essential to eliminate barriers that prevent treatment of women who present, including ensuring adequate supplies and staff for treatment.

HPV-based cervical cancer screening in low-resource settings: Maximizing the efficiency of community-based strategies in rural Kenya.

OBJECTIVE: To characterize the efficiency of screening through high-volume community health campaigns (CHCs) by comparing the costs and population reach and identify factors associated with gains in efficiency. Access to effective cervical cancer screening remains limited in low-resource settings, especially in rural areas. Periodic CHCs are a novel method of offering screening for HPV at lower costs and higher population coverage than health facilities. METHODS: A micro-costing study was conducted within a cervical cancer screening trial to measure efficiency (cost per woman screened) and population uptake of HPV-based screening offered through CHCs in Migori County, Kenya between January and September 2016. Regression analysis assessed relationships between population size and efficiency. Structured observations and qualitative interviews identified implementation factors that affected efficiency in individual campaigns. RESULTS: Communities screening through CHCs had costs per woman screened ranging from US $22.06 to $30.21. Efficiency was directly correlated to overall numbers of women screened, but not to proportion of population screened. Modifiable factors that acted as context-specific facilitators and barriers with a potential impact on efficiency were identified. CONCLUSION: There was substantial variation in efficiency among CHCs. Cultural factors, health beliefs, and poor coordination among implementation partners as potential key barriers to screening uptake were identified.

Female perspectives on male involvement in a human-papillomavirus-based cervical cancer-screening program in western Kenya.

BACKGROUND: To be effective, population-based cervical cancer prevention programs must be tailored to meet the needs of the target population. One important factor in cervical cancer screening may include male involvement. To iteratively improve a screening program employing self-collected vaginal swabs for human-papillomavirus (HPV) testing in western Kenya, we examined the role of male partners and community leaders in decision-making and accessing screening services. METHODS: We carried out 604 semi-structured, in-depth interviews (IDIs) with women and community health volunteers who took part in a multiphase trial of implementation strategies for HPV-based cervical cancer screening. IDIs were coded and themes related to decision-making, screening and treatment barriers, and influence of male partners and community leaders were identified and analyzed. RESULTS: Women experienced both support and opposition from their male partners. Partner support took the form of financial support for transportation and emotional support and encouragement, while opposition ranged from anticipated negative reactions to lack of permission, isolation, and abandonment. Though most women described their own partners as supportive, many felt that other male partners would not be supportive. Most participants believed that increased HPV and cervical cancer knowledge would increase partner support. Women reported a general acceptance of involvement of community leaders in education and screening campaigns, in a setting where such leaders may hold influence over men in the community. CONCLUSION: There was a clear interest in involving male partners in the cervical cancer prevention process, specifically in increasing knowledge and awareness. Future research should explore the feasibility and effectiveness of engaging male partners in cervical cancer screening and prevention programs.

Estimated Quality of Life and Economic Outcomes Associated With 12 Cervical Cancer Screening Strategies: A Cost-effectiveness Analysis.

Importance: Many cervical cancer screening strategies are now recommended in the United States, but the benefits, harms, and costs of each option are unclear. Objective: To estimate the cost-effectiveness of 12 cervical cancer screening strategies. Design, Setting, and Participants: The cross-sectional portion of this study enrolled a convenience sample of 451 English-speaking or Spanish-speaking women aged 21 to 65 years from September 22, 2014, to June 16, 2016, identified at women's health clinics in San Francisco. In this group, utilities (preferences) were measured for 23 cervical cancer screening-associated health states and were applied to a decision model of type-specific high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV)-induced cervical carcinogenesis. Test accuracy estimates were abstracted from systematic reviews. The evaluated strategies were cytologic testing every 3 years for women aged 21 to 65 years with either repeat cytologic testing in 1 year or immediate hrHPV triage for atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASC-US), cytologic testing every 3 years for women age 21 to 29 years followed by cytologic testing plus hrHPV testing (cotesting), or primary hrHPV testing alone for women aged 30 to 65 years. Screening frequency, abnormal test result management, and the age to switch from cytologic testing to hrHPV testing (25 or 30 years) were varied. Analyses were conducted from both the societal and health care sector perspectives. Main Outcomes and Measures: Utilities for 23 cervical cancer screening-associated health states (cross-sectional study) and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and total costs for each strategy. Results: Utilities were measured in a sociodemographically diverse group of 451 women (mean [SD] age, 38.2 [10.7] years; 258 nonwhite [57.2%]). Cytologic testing every 3 years with repeat cytologic testing for ASC-US yielded the most lifetime QALYs and conferred more QALYs at higher costs ($2166 per QALY) than the lowest-cost strategy (cytologic testing every 3 years with hrHPV triage of ASC-US). All cytologic testing plus hrHPV testing (cotesting) and primary hrHPV testing strategies provided fewer QALYs at higher costs. Adding indirect costs did not change the conclusions. In sensitivity analyses, hrHPV testing every 5 years with genotyping triage beginning at age 30 years was the lowest-cost strategy when hrHPV test sensitivity was markedly higher than cytologic test sensitivity or when hrHPV test cost was equated to the lowest reported cytologic test cost ($14). Conclusions and Relevance: Cytologic testing every 3 years for women aged 21 to 29 years with either continued cytologic testing every 3 years or switching to a low-cost hrHPV test every 5 years confers a reasonable balance of benefits, harms, and costs. Comparative modeling is needed to confirm the association of these novel utilities with cost-effectiveness.

Cost of HPV screening at community health campaigns (CHCs) and health clinics in rural Kenya.

BACKGROUND: Cervical cancer is the most frequent neoplasm among Kenyan women, with 4800 diagnoses and 2400 deaths per year. One reason is an extremely low rate of screening through pap smears, at 13.8% in 2014. Knowing the costs of screening will help planners and policymakers design, implement, and scale programs. METHODS: We conducted HPV-based cervical cancer screening via self-collection in 12 communities in rural Migori County, Kenya. Six communities were randomized to community health campaigns (CHCs), and six to screening at government clinics. All HPV-positive women were referred for cryotherapy at Migori County Hospital. We prospectively estimated direct costs from the health system perspective, using micro-costing methods. Cost data were extracted from expenditure records, staff interviews, and time and motion logs. Total costs per woman screening included three activities: outreach, HPV-based screening, and notification. Types of inputs include personnel, recurrent goods, capital goods, and services. We costed potential changes to implementation for scaling. RESULTS: From January to September 2016, 2899 women were screened in CHCs and 2042 in clinics. Each CHC lasted for 30 working days, 10 days each for outreach, screening, and notification. The mean cost per woman screened was $25.00 for CHCs [median: $25.09; Range: $22.06-30.21] and $29.56 for clinics [$28.90; $25.27-37.08]. Clinics had higher costs than CHCs for personnel ($14.27 vs. $11.26) and capital ($5.55 vs. $2.80). Screening costs were higher for clinics at $21.84, compared to $17.48 for CHCs. In contrast, CHCs had higher outreach costs ($3.34 vs. $0.17). After modeling a reduction in staffing, clinic per-screening costs ($25.69) were approximately equivalent to CHCs. CONCLUSIONS: HPV-based cervical cancer screening through community health campaigns achieved lower costs per woman screened, compared to screening at clinics. Periodic high-volume CHCs appear to be a viable low-cost strategy for implementing cervical cancer screening.

Barriers to Cervical Cancer Screening in Rural Kenya: Perspectives from a Provider Survey.

Although cervical cancer is highly preventable through screening, it remains the number one cause of cancer-related death in Kenyan women due to lack of funding and infrastructure for prevention programs. In 2012, Family AIDS Care and Education Services in partnership with the Kenya Ministry of Health began offering free screening at eleven rural health facilities. We sought to explore why screening coverage remains low at some sites. We examined the barriers to screening through a survey of 106 healthcare staff. The most frequently cited barriers to service delivery included staffing shortages, lack of trained staff, insufficient space, and supply issues. The patient barriers commonly perceived by the staff included inadequate knowledge, wait time, discomfort with male providers, and fear of pain with the speculum exam. Despite multilateral efforts to implement cervical cancer screening, staff face significant challenges to service provision and increased education is needed for both providers and patients.

Cervical Cancer Screening Knowledge and Behavior among Women Attending an Urban HIV Clinic in Western Kenya.

Cervical cancer is a highly preventable disease that disproportionately affects women in developing countries and women with HIV. As integrated HIV and cervical cancer screening programs in Sub-Saharan Africa mature, we have an opportunity to measure the impact of outreach and education efforts and identify areas for future improvement. We conducted a cross-sectional survey of 106 women enrolled in care at an integrated HIV clinic in the Nyanza Province of Kenya 5 years after the start of a cervical cancer screening program. Female clinic attendees who met clinic criteria for cervical cancer screening were asked to complete an oral questionnaire assessing their cervical cancer knowledge, attitudes, and screening history. Ninety-nine percent of women had heard of screening, 70 % felt at risk, and 84 % had been screened. Increased duration of HIV diagnosis was associated with feeling at risk and with a screening history. Nearly half (48 %) of women said they would not get screened if they had to pay for it.