HPV multilevel intervention strategies targeting immunization in community settings (HPV MISTICS): Study protocol for a hybrid 1 stepped-wedge cluster randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: This protocol paper describes the overall design for HPV MISTICS, a multilevel intervention to increase human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination initiation and completion rates among adolescents aged 11-17. METHODS: We will conduct a hybrid type 1 implementation-effectiveness trial using a stepped-wedge cluster randomized trial in eight federally qualified health centers (FQHCs) in Florida. Intervention components target three levels: system, providers, and parents. Outcomes will be assessed using quantitative (e.g., vaccination data, survey data) and qualitative methods (e.g., staff and parent interviews). We expect to quantify changes in HPV vaccine series initiation and completion rates for adolescents ages 11-17 in the eight FQHCs. We have hypothesized a 20-percentage point increase in HPV vaccine series initiation and a 10-percentage point increase in series completion. We also anticipate being able to explore factors at the system, provider, and patient levels as potential covariates. Implementation outcomes, barriers, and facilitators identified in the study will help characterize the implementation process and inform potential future intervention scale-up. RESULTS: The project is ongoing; effectiveness and implementation outcomes will be determined following project completion. CONCLUSIONS: Findings will provide evidence of an equity-informed research design and implementation procedures that could help improve HPV vaccination rates in similar health systems. CLINICAL TRIALS IDENTIFIER: NCT05677360 (date registered: 2022-12-22); https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05677360?lead=Moffitt%20Cancer%20Center%20&aggFilters=status:rec&page=2&rank=17.

Factors Associated With Guideline-concordant and Excessive Cervical Cancer Screening: A Mixed Methods Study.

INTRODUCTION: National guidelines recommend cervical cancer screening with Papanicolaou (Pap) testing at 3-year intervals or with human papillomavirus (HPV) testing alone or HPV/Pap cotesting at 5-year intervals for average-risk individuals aged 30-65 years. METHODS: We explored factors associated with clinician-reported guideline-concordant screening, as well as facilitators and barriers to appropriate cervical cancer screening. RESULTS: A national sample of clinicians (N = 1,251) completed surveys; a subset (n = 55) completed interviews. Most (94%) reported that they screened average-risk patients aged 30-65 years with cotesting. Nearly all clinicians who were categorized as nonadherent to national guidelines were overscreening (98%). Guideline concordant screening was reported by 47% and 82% of those using cotesting and HPV testing, respectively (5-year intervals), and by 62% of those using Pap testing only (3-year intervals). Concordant screening was reported more often by clinicians who were aged <40 years, non-Hispanic, and practicing in the West or Midwest, and less often by obstetrician-gynecologists and private practice physicians. Concordant screening was facilitated by beliefs that updated guidelines were evidence-based and reduced harms, health care system dissemination of guidelines, and electronic medical record prompts. Barriers to concordant screening included using outdated guidelines, relying on personal judgment, concern about missing cancers, inappropriate patient risk assessment, and lack of support for guideline adoption through health care systems or electronic medical records. CONCLUSIONS: Most clinicians screened with Pap/HPV cotesting and approximately one-half endorsed a 5-year screening interval. Clinician knowledge gaps include understanding the evidence underlying 5-year intervals and appropriate risk assessment to determine which patients should be screened more frequently. Education and tracking systems can promote guideline-concordant screening.

Examining the perceived impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cervical cancer screening practices among clinicians practicing in Federally Qualified Health Centers: A mixed methods study.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic led to reductions in cervical cancer screening and colposcopy. Therefore, in this mixed methods study we explored perceived pandemic-related practice changes to cervical cancer screenings in federally qualified health centers (FQHCs). Methods: Between October 2021 and June 2022, we conducted a national web survey of clinicians (physicians and advanced practice providers) who performed cervical cancer screening in FQHCs in the United States during the post-acute phase of the COVID-19 pandemic, along with a sub-set of qualitative interviews via video conference, to examine perceived changes in cervical cancer screening practices during the pandemic. Results: A total of 148 clinicians completed surveys; a subset (n=13) completed qualitative interviews. Most (86%) reported reduced cervical cancer screening early in the pandemic, and 28% reported continued reduction in services at the time of survey completion (October 2021- July 2022). Nearly half (45%) reported staff shortages impacting their ability to screen or track patients. Compared to clinicians in Obstetrics/Gynecology/Women's health, those in family medicine and other specialties more often reported reduced screening compared to pre-pandemic. Most (92%) felt that screening using HPV self-sampling would be very or somewhat helpful to address screening backlogs. Qualitative interviews highlighted the impacts of staff shortages and strategies for improvement. Conclusions: Findings highlight that in late 2021 and early 2022, many clinicians in FQHCs reported reduced cervical cancer screening and of pandemic-related staffing shortages impacting screening and follow-up. If not addressed, reduced screenings among underserved populations could worsen cervical cancer disparities in the future. Funding: This study was funded by the American Cancer Society, who had no role in the study's design, conduct, or reporting.

Examining the association of clinician characteristics with perceived changes in cervical cancer screening and colposcopy practice during the COVID-19 pandemic: a mixed methods assessment.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic led to reductions in cervical cancer screening and colposcopy. Therefore, in this mixed method study we explored perceived pandemic-related practice changes to cervical cancer screenings and colposcopies. Methods: In 2021, a national sample of 1251 clinicians completed surveys, including 675 clinicians who performed colposcopy; a subset (n=55) of clinicians completed qualitative interviews. Results: Nearly half of all clinicians reported they were currently performing fewer cervical cancer screenings (47%) and colposcopies (44% of those who perform the procedure) than before the pandemic. About one-fifth (18.6%) of colposcopists reported performing fewer LEEPs than prior to the pandemic. Binomial regression analyses indicated that older, as well as internal medicine and family medicine clinicians (compared to OB-GYNs), and those practicing in community health centers (compared to private practice) had higher odds of reporting reduced screening. Among colposcopists, internal medicine physicians and those practicing in community health centers had higher odds of reporting reduced colposcopies. Qualitative interviews highlighted pandemic-related care disruptions and lack of tracking systems to identify overdue screenings. Conclusions: Reductions in cervical cancer screening and colposcopy among nearly half of clinicians more than 1 year into the pandemic raise concerns that inadequate screening and follow-up will lead to future increases in preventable cancers. Funding: This study was funded by the American Cancer Society, who had no role in the study's design, conduct, or reporting.

A cross-sectional survey examining clinician characteristics, practices, and attitudes associated with adoption of the 2019 American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology risk-based management consensus guidelines.

BACKGROUND: The 2019 American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology (ASCCP) risk-based management consensus guidelines are the most recent national guidelines for the management of abnormal cervical cancer screening tests. These guidelines benefit patients by concentrating testing and treatment in those at highest cervical cancer risk. Adoption of guidelines often occurs slowly, with few studies examining the factors associated with guideline-adherent management of abnormal results. METHODS: To elucidate the factors associated with the use of the 2019 ASCCP guidelines among clinicians who perform cervical cancer screening, physicians and advanced practice professionals who perform cervical cancer screening were cross-sectionally surveyed. Clinicians responded to screening vignettes with differing recommendations for management between the 2019 and prior management guidelines. Screening vignette 1 involved reduction of invasive testing on a low-risk patient; screening vignette 2 involved increased surveillance testing on a high-risk patient. Binomial logistic regression models determined the factors associated with the use of the 2019 guidelines. RESULTS: A total of 1251 clinicians participated from across the United States. For screening vignettes 1 and 2, guideline-adherent responses were given by 28% and 36% of participants, respectively. Management recommendations differed by specialty and were incorrect in different situations: there was inappropriate invasive testing by obstetrics and gynecology physicians (vignette 1) and inappropriate discontinuation of screening by family and internal medicine physicians (vignette 2). Regardless of their chosen response, over half erroneously believed they were guideline adherent. CONCLUSIONS: Many clinicians who believe they are following appropriate guidelines may not realize their management strategy is inconsistent with the 2019 guidelines. Education initiatives tailored to clinician specialty could address the understanding of current guidelines, encourage the use of updated guidelines, maximize patient benefits, and minimize harms. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: The 2019 American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology risk-based management consensus guidelines are the most recent national guidelines for abnormal cervical cancer screening test management. We surveyed over 1200 obstetrics and gynecology (OB/GYN), family medicine, and internal medicine physicians and advanced practice providers about their screening and abnormal results follow-up practices in relation to guidelines. Few clinicians are following the 2019 guidelines. Management recommendations differed by clinician specialty and were incorrect in different situations: there was inappropriate invasive testing by OB/GYN physicians and inappropriate screening discontinuation by family and internal medicine physicians. Education tailored by clinician specialty could address the understanding of current guidelines, encourage the use of updated guidelines, maximize patient benefits, and minimize harms.

HPV vaccine recommendations by age: A survey of providers in federally qualified health centers.

Clinician recommendation remains a critical factor in improving HPV vaccine uptake. Clinicians practicing in federally qualified health centers were surveyed between October 2021 and July 2022. Clinicians were asked how they recommended HPV vaccination for patients aged 9-10, 11-12, 13-18, 19-26, and 27-45 y (strongly recommend, offer but do not recommend strongly, discuss only if the patient initiates the conversation, or recommend against). Descriptive statistics were assessed, and exact binomial logistic regression analyses were utilized to examine factors associated with HPV vaccination recommendation in 9-10-y-old patients. Respondents (n = 148) were primarily female (85%), between the ages of 30-39 (38%), white, non-Hispanic (62%), advanced practice providers (55%), family medicine specialty (70%), and practicing in the Northeast (63%). Strong recommendations for HPV vaccination varied by age: 65% strongly recommended for ages 9-10, 94% for ages 11-12, 96% for ages 13-18, 82% for age 19-26, and 26% for ages 27-45 y. Compared to Women's Health/OBGYN specialty, family medicine clinicians were less likely to recommend HPV vaccination at ages 9-10 (p = .03). Approximately two-thirds of clinicians practicing in federally qualified health centers or safety net settings strongly recommend HPV vaccine series initiation at ages 9-10. Additional research is needed to improve recommendations in younger age groups.

Development of a Patient Activation Toolkit for Hepatitis C Virus Testing.

We evaluated the acceptability of a patient activation toolkit for hepatitis C virus (HCV) testing amidst universal adult guidelines. We developed a patient-facing toolkit that included a letter to the patient from their healthcare provider, HCV factsheet, and question prompt list, which contained questions for their provider about HCV infection and testing. We conducted qualitative interviews with patients ages 18-78 (n = 17), using a semi-structured interview guide based on learner verification. We assessed attraction, comprehension, cultural-linguistic acceptability, self-efficacy, and persuasiveness of toolkit materials using direct content analysis. Participants reported materials were attractive, offering suggestions to improve readability. They reported some understanding of materials but requested use of less medical jargon, particularly for the factsheet. Participants discussed cultural acceptability and suggested ways to improve language inclusiveness and comfort with content, given stigma surrounding HCV risk factors. Participants reported that including a letter, factsheet, and QPL improved the persuasiveness of materials, and they conveyed their motivation to be tested for HCV. Results indicate preliminary acceptability for use of the patient activation toolkit, which will be refined based on participants' recommendations. Overall, this patient activation toolkit holds promise for increasing HCV testing rates.