Obtaining Self-Samples to Diagnose Curable Sexually Transmitted Infections: A Systematic Review of Patients’ Experiences
Open Access
- 24 April 2015
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Public Library of Science (PLoS) in PLOS ONE
- Vol. 10 (4), e0124310
- https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0124310
Abstract
Routine screening is key to sexually transmitted infection (STI) prevention and control. Previous studies suggest that clinic-based screening programmes capture only a small proportion of people with STIs. Self-sampling using non- or minimally invasive techniques may be beneficial for those reluctant to actively engage with conventional sampling methods. We systematically reviewed studies of patients’ experiences of obtaining self-samples to diagnose curable STIs. We conducted an electronic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsychINFO, BNI, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews to identify relevant articles published in English between January 1980 and March 2014. Studies were included if participants self-sampled for the diagnosis of a curable STI and had specifically sought participants’ opinions of their experience, acceptability, preferences, or willingness to self-sample. The initial search yielded 558 references. Of these, 45 studies met the inclusion criteria. Thirty-six studies assessed patients’ acceptability and experiences of self-sampling. Pooled results from these studies shows that self-sampling is a highly acceptable method with 85% of patients reporting the method to be well received and acceptable. Twenty-eight studies reported on ease of self-sampling; the majority of patients (88%) in these studies found self-sampling an “easy” procedure. Self-sampling was favoured compared to clinician sampling, and home sampling was preferred to clinic-based sampling. Females and older participants were more accepting of self-sampling. Only a small minority of participants (13%) reported pain during self-sampling. Participants were willing to undergo self-sampling and recommend others. Privacy and safety were the most common concerns. Self-sampling for diagnostic testing is well accepted with the majority having a positive experience and willingness to use again. Standardization of self-sampling procedures and rigorous validation of outcome measurement will lead to better comparability across studies. Future studies need to conduct rigorous economic evaluations of self-sampling to inform policy development for the management of STI.Keywords
This publication has 63 references indexed in Scilit:
- To develop and measure the effectiveness and acceptability of a pharmacy-based chlamydia screening intervention in AustraliaBMJ Open, 2013
- A Review of Self-Testing for HIV: Research and Policy Priorities in a New Era of HIV PreventionClinical Infectious Diseases, 2013
- Acceptability of self-testing for trichomoniasis increases with experienceSexually Transmitted Infections, 2011
- Screening for sexually transmitted infections at home or in the clinic?Current Opinion in Infectious Diseases, 2011
- Internet-Based Screening for Sexually Transmitted Infections to Reach Nonclinic Populations in the Community: Risk Factors for Infection in MenSexually Transmitted Diseases, 2010
- Home Compared With Clinic-Based Screening for Sexually Transmitted InfectionsObstetrics & Gynecology, 2010
- Home Screening Compared With Clinic-Based Screening for Sexually Transmitted InfectionsObstetrics & Gynecology, 2010
- Home-based versus clinic-based self-sampling and testing for sexually transmitted infections in Gugulethu, South Africa: randomised controlled trialSexually Transmitted Infections, 2007
- New point of care Chlamydia Rapid Test—bridging the gap between diagnosis and treatment: performance evaluation studyBMJ, 2007
- The cost effectiveness of opportunistic chlamydia screening in EnglandSexually Transmitted Infections, 2007