Article Text

Download PDFPDF
EP1065 Comparison of two self-sampler devices for cervical screening in a South African population
  1. A Breidenthal1,
  2. FH van der Merwe1,
  3. G Dreyer2,
  4. L Snyman2,
  5. C Visser2 and
  6. MH Botha1
  1. 1Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of Stellenbosch, Cape Town
  2. 2Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology and Gynaecological Oncology Unit, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, South Africa


Introduction/Background Self-sampling is an attractive addition to cervical screening programmes. It can remove barriers to testing as some women fear a gynaecological examination, and offers potential task shifting and resource savings for overburdened health care systems often in low resource settings.

Methodology We performed a large cervical cancer screening study with ultimate objective to determine optimal screening algorithms for South African women. This interim analysis describes the experiences of a subset of women who were asked to fill in a questionnaire about the self-samplers. The aim was to compare user experiences of two different self-samplers in a South African public sector setting.

253 participants received a short education by the Health Care Worker (HCW), and were given either the Digene HC2 DNA Collection Device (Qiagen)or the Evalyn® Brush (Rovers Medical). Participant and HCW filled in a questionnaire afterwards.

Results Analysis was done for 253 women. Mean age in group was 41.33 years (range [24–63], median 41 years). 82 women were in the Digene group, and 171 in the Evalyn group.

HCWs reported more bleeding with the Digene vs. Evalyn users (37.9% vs. 20.4%).

Both groups felt it was very or somewhat easy to use (98.8% vs. 94.2%). Women had little fear of using the devices, (61.0% vs 71.3%), and felt sure of how to use them. There was more bleeding reported by Digene vs Evalyn users (9.8% vs. 4.1%), and lastly, there was little pain experienced by users of either brush, 91.5% vs 93.6%.

Conclusion In this cohort, both the self-samplers were well tolerated; there was more bleeding associated with use of the Digene device, both seen by participants and HCW, which will be analysed further once results are available. Self-sampling is feasible and acceptable in this public setting.

Disclosure Rover BD donated Evalyn brushes for the study, and Qiagen provided digene collection devices, but neither were involved in preparing papers.

Abstract EP1065 Figure 1

Proportion of responders %: Digene

Abstract EP1065 Figure 2

Proportion of responders %: Evalyn]

Statistics from

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.