Physician-collected Specimens Research Articles

Adequacy and Acceptability of the Self-Collected Anal Pap Smear in People Living With Human Immunodeficiency Virus in the Infectious Diseases Clinic.

Background Anal Pap smears are imperative to screening for human papillomavirus (HPV)-associated anal squamous cell cancers, particularly in patients living withhuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV) given a higher incidence of disease. Self-collection of specimens may be favored by patients and more feasible to collect, increasing screening. Methods This was a single-center observational cohort study at a single academic medical center Infectious Diseases clinic from October to December 2021. We aimed to improve compliance of anal Pap collection documentation of "self-collected" versus "physician-collected" as well as verify if self-collected specimens (SCS) were adequate for interpretation equivalent to physician-collected specimens (PCS). Additionally, we aimed to evaluate patient and provider satisfaction with self-collected anal Paps. Results Sixty anal Pap smears were available for evaluation. The rate of documentation of the collection method (self-collected vs. physician-collected) was 88% during the intervention. A total of 75% of patients opted for self-collection, and 35/45 (78%) of these samples were adequate for interpretation. There was no difference in the adequacy of specimen (the ability of a cytopathologist to interpret the specimen) between the SCS and PCS. Conclusion Limited prior data suggest self-collected anal Pap specimens are adequate for interpretation only slightly less often than PCS. In our small cohort, there was no statistically significant difference between collection methods. Satisfaction with self-collection of specimens was high for both patients and providers. Additional validation in more diverse/larger clinical settings may be helpful to support this practice.

Self- and physician-collected high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) testing to detect high-grade cervical lesions among Thai women

ObjectiveWe compared the performance of high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) messenger RNA testing of physician- and self-collected specimens for detecting histological grade 2 or higher cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) among women...

447. Improvement of Anal Pap Collection Documentation and Adequacy in PLWHIV in Infectious Diseases Clinic

Abstract Background Anal Pap smear is an essential screening tool for high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV)-associated anal squamous cell carcinoma (ASCC), particularly in people living with HIV (PLWHIV). Currently, there is no consensus regarding time interval or protocols for screening of anal hrHPV-associated cancer. Limited reports suggest self-collected specimens have similar cytology sensitivity compared to physician-collected samples. Methods We utilized a Quality Improvement project (QIP) to assess validity of self-collected anal swab specimens (SCS) for screening of hrHPV-related anal lesions versus physician-collected specimens (PCS) over 3 months. The protocol was implemented in an Infectious Diseases clinic by patients and physicians during routine visits. Patients learned about the QIP via educational handout and were offered self- or physician-collection. Results A total of 60 patients participated. Seventy-five percent opted for self-collection and 35/45 (78%) SCS were adequate for interpretation, compared to 10/15 (67%) PCS. Fisher exact test value was 0.49, indicating no significant difference between groups (at p< .05). In total, 77% of patients completed the satisfaction survey. Only 13% reported preference for physician-performed procedure, while 63% felt that a self-collection option made them more likely to complete the Pap. A limitation to this project is the Hawthorne effect, as participants were aware of the QIP and that validity of the samples depended on appropriate sample collection. There was also a relatively small sample size of self-collected specimens (n=45). Survey results Final result from surveys answered by patients that participated in the project. Conclusion Survey analysis showed increased patient satisfaction and similar adequacy of samples collected. While the project was not powered to demonstrate an increase in acceptance of anal Paps, increased satisfaction could lead to improvement over time with a simple and inexpensive workflow adjustment. Additionally, with expansion of telehealth, self-collected anal Paps may increase opportunities to complete screening at times physicians are not available. Studies with larger populations, in multiple institutions and with varying educational handouts/instruction methods may provide better data to corroborate recommendations regarding best practices for screening for ASCC. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures.

Evaluation of the effectiveness of BMRT-HPV for cervical cancer screening

Objective: Evaluation of the clinical value of the BioPerfectus multiplex real time (BMRT)-HPV for cervical cancer screening. Methods: Physician-collected specimens of 1 495 women who were positive of Cobas 4800 HPV (Cobas-HPV), HPV genotyping based on SEQ uencing (SEQ-HPV), and (or) cytology ≥low grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (LSIL) in the primary screening of Chinese Multiple-center Screening Trial (CHIMUST), and 2 990 women selected from those who were negative of primary screening in the same project through nested control randomization with age-matching were tested for BMRT-HPV, which reported type-specific viral loads/10 000 cells in each specimen. With comparing to Cobas-HPV results and taking cervical histopathological diagnosis as the endpoint, the concordance of high-risk (HR)-HPV subtypes among the three assays was explored ,and the sensitivity and specificity of BMRT-HPV for cervical cancer screening were evaluated. Results: (1) The overall agreenment of HR-HPV subtypes between BMRT-HPV and Cobas-HPV, or SEQ-HPV test sample was 94.8%, 94.4%, with Kappa values 0.827, 0.814. (2) The sensitivity and specificity for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) Ⅱ+ of BMRT-HPV, Cobas-HPV and SEQ-HPV were 92.62%, 94.26%, 93.44% and 84.67%, 83.25%, 82.76%, respectively. There were no significant difference in sensitivity among the three HPV assays (all P>0.05), but the specificity of BMRT-HPV for CIN Ⅱ+ was higher than those of Cobas-HPV and SEQ-HPV (P<0.01). The sensitivity for CIN Ⅲ+ of three HPV assays were all 100.00%, and the specificity for CIN Ⅲ+ of BMRT-HPV was higher than those of Cobas-HPV and SEQ-HPV (83.40% vs 81.95%, 83.40% vs 81.50%; P<0.01). The number of pathological examinations of colposcopy for cervical biopsy detected in 1 case of CIN Ⅱ+ or CIN Ⅲ+ in BMRT-HPV was less than those in Cobas-HPV and SEQ-HPV (P<0.01). When using HPV 16/18 + cytology ≥atypical squamous cell of undetermined signification (ASCUS) to triage HPV positive women among three assays, there was no different in the sensitivities of detecting CIN Ⅱ+ and CIN Ⅲ+ (P>0.05). The specificity BMRT-HPV was slightly higher than those in Cobas-HPV or SEQ-HPV (all P<0.05), and the colposcopy referral rate was lower than those in Cobas-HPV and SEQ-HPV (all P<0.05). Conclusions: BMRT-HPV is as sensitive as Cobas-HPV or SEQ-HPV for primary cervical cancer screening, and has higher specificity. Therefore it could be used as a primary screening method for cervical cancer, which is worthy of clinical application.

High-risk Human Papillomavirus Messenger RNA Testing in Wet and Dry Self-collected Specimens for High-grade Cervical Lesion Detection in Mombasa, Kenya.

Self-collection for high-risk human papillomavirus (hr-HPV) messenger RNA (mRNA) testing may improve cervical cancer screening. High-risk HPV mRNA with self-collected specimens stored dry could enhance feasibility and acceptance of specimen collection and storage; however, its performance is unknown. We compared the performance of hr-HPV mRNA testing with dry- as compared with wet-stored self-collected specimens for detecting high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion or more severe (≥HSIL). A total of 400 female sex workers in Kenya participated (2013-2018), of which 50% were HIV positive based on enrollment procedures. Participants provided 2 self-collected specimens: one stored dry (sc-DRY) using a Viba brush (Rovers) and one stored wet (sc-WET) with Aptima media (Hologic) using an Evalyn brush (Rovers). Physician-collected specimens were collected for HPV mRNA testing (Aptima) and conventional cytology. We estimated test characteristics for each hr-HPV screening method using conventional cytology as the reference standard (≥HSIL detection). We also examined participant preference for sc-DRY and sc-WET collection. High-risk HPV mRNA positivity was higher in sc-WET (36.8%) than sc-DRY samples (31.8%). Prevalence of ≥HSIL was 6.9% (10.3% HIV positive, 4.0% HIV negative). Sensitivity of hr-HPV mRNA for detecting ≥HSIL was similar in sc-WET (85%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 66%-96%), sc-DRY specimens (78%; 95% CI, 58%-91%), and physician-collected specimens (93%; 95% CI, 76%-99%). Overall, the specificity of hr-HPV mRNA for ≥HSIL detection was similar when comparing sc-WET with physician collection. However, specificity was lower for sc-WET (66% [61%-71%]) than sc-DRY (71% [66%-76%]). Women preferred sc-DRY specimen collection (46.1%) compared with sc-WET (31.1%). However, more women preferred physician collection (63.9%) compared with self-collection (36.1%). Self-collected stored-dry specimens seemed to perform similarly to sc-WET for the detection of ≥HSIL.

Prospective cohort study examining cervical cancer screening methods in HIV-positive and HIV-negative Cambodian Women: a comparison of human papilloma virus testing, visualization with acetic acid and digital colposcopy

ObjectivesLogistical and economic issues make traditional cytology-based cervical cancer screening challenging in developing countries. Alternative, cost-effective, screening strategies must be developed to screen millions of women in resource-poor countries such...

Durability of clinical performance afforded by self-collected HPV testing: A 15-year cohort study in China

ObjectiveSelf-collected HPV testing could substantially reduce disparities in cervical cancer screening, with slightly lower sensitivity compared to physician-collected specimens cross-sectionally. We aimed to evaluate the comprehensive long-term performance of self-collected HPV testing prospectively. MethodsIn 1999, 1997 women were screened by HPV testing on self-collected and physician-collected samples, cytology and visual inspection with acetic acid (VIA) and followed up in 2005, 2010 and 2014, respectively. HPV testing was performed with Hybrid Capture II. Prospective performance, baseline clinical efficiency, and 15-year cumulative risk of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or higher (CIN2+) were analyzed. ResultsSelf-collected HPV testing prospectively detected 83.3% (95% CI:74.9%,89.3%), 70.3% (95% CI:62.5%,77.2%) and 63.3% (95% CI:55.7%, 70.2%) of cumulative CIN2+ at 6-year, 11-year and 15-year follow-up, respectively. Relative cumulative sensitivity of physician-collected HPV testing versus self-collected HPV testing was stable over 15 years at about 1.16. Cumulative sensitivity of self-collected HPV testing was comparable to cytology and significantly higher than VIA. Among women positive by self-collected HPV testing at baseline, 26.2% (95% CI:21.5%, 30.9%) developed CIN2+ during 6-year follow-up and no difference was observed with physician-collected HPV testing even 15 years after baseline. Negative self-collected HPV results provided greater protection against CIN2+ than VIA and ascertained CIN2+ cumulative incident rates as low as 1.1% at the 6-year follow-up. ConclusionsSelf-collected HPV testing demonstrates lower sensitivity than physician-collected HPV testing but performs comparably to cytology prospectively and provides satisfactory assurance against CIN2+, indicating an alternative role in cervical cancer primary screening with five-year interval as an option especially in low-resource settings.

Excellent analytical and clinical performance of a dry self-sampling device for human papillomavirus detection in an urban Chinese referral population.

To evaluate the analytical and clinical effectiveness of cervicovaginal self-sampling with a dry sampling device (Evalyn Brush) for high-risk human papillomavirus (hr-HPV) testing and detection of cervical disease. The study population consisted of 101 patients from a large gynecological outpatient clinic in Shanghai referred for abnormal cervical screening results and 101 women without cervical lesions. Self-samples obtained in the clinic and physician-collected cervical specimens (reference) were stored at -20 °C for 16-18 weeks and then transferred to 20 ml of ThinPrep medium and tested for hr-HPV using a multiplex real time polymerase chain reaction assay. All women had a colposcopic examination with a Pap smear and directed or random biopsies. High risk-HPV was detected in 92 patients (45.5%) with the self-collected cervicovaginal specimens and in 93 (46.0%) with the physician-collected cervical specimens, resulting in an agreement of 97.5% and a Kappa of 0.95 (95% confidence interval 0.91-0.99). Among all of the included women, 46 (22.8%) had cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 or worse (cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 3+). Hr-HPV was found in 43 of these patients (93.5%) with self-sampling and in 44 (95.7%) with the physician-collected specimens. Self-collected dry cervicovaginal samples transferred to ThinPrep medium and tested for hr-HPV using a clinically validated polymerase chain reaction assay showed very good agreement with physician-collected cervical specimens and a very high hr-HPV positivity rate for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 3 +.

High-Risk Human Papillomavirus Messenger RNA Testing in Physician- and Self-Collected Specimens for Cervical Lesion Detection in High-Risk Women, Kenya

Little is known about the performance of physician-versus self-collected specimens for high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) messenger RNA (mRNA) testing or risk factors for hrHPV mRNA positivity in physician- versus self-collected specimens. We compared the performance of hrHPV mRNA testing of physician- and self-collected specimens for detecting cytological high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions or more severe (≥HSIL) and examined risk factors for hrHPV mRNA positivity in female sex workers in Nairobi. From 2009 to 2011, 344 female sex workers participated in this cross-sectional study. Women self-collected a cervicovaginal specimen. A physician conducted a pelvic examination to obtain a cervical specimen. Physician- and self-collected specimens were tested for hrHPV mRNA and sexually transmitted infections using APTIMA nucleic acid amplification assays (Hologic/Gen-Probe Incorporated, San Diego, CA). Cervical cytology was conducted using physician-collected specimens and classified according to the Bethesda criteria. Overall hrHPV mRNA prevalence was similar in physician- and self-collected specimens (30% vs. 29%). Prevalence of ≥HSIL was 4% (n = 15). Overall sensitivity of hrHPV testing for detecting ≥HSIL was similar in physician-collected (86%; 95% CI, 62%-98%; 13 cases detected) and self-collected specimens (79%; 95% CI, 55%-95%; 12 cases detected). Overall specificity of hrHPV mRNA for ≥HSIL was similar in both physician-collected (73%; 95% CI, 68%-79%) and self-collected (75%; 95% CI, 70%-79%) specimens. High-risk HPV mRNA positivity in both physician- and self-collected specimens seemed higher in women who were younger (<30 years), had Trichomonas vaginalis or Mycoplasma genitalium infections, or had more than 8 years of educational attainment. Self-collected specimens for hrHPV mRNA testing seemed to have similar sensitivity and specificity as physician-collected specimens for the detection of ≥HSIL among high-risk women.

P3.116 Risk Factors For Mycoplasma Genitalium Among Female Sex Workers in Nairobi, Kenya

BackgroundPrevalence of Mycoplasma genitalium is higher in vulnerable populations of women in low-resource settings; predictors for infection, however, are not well understood. This study aimed to determine the prevalence of...

Clinical evaluation of high-risk HPV detection on self-samples using the indicating FTA-elute solid-carrier cartridge

BackgroundHigh-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) testing in cervical screening is usually performed on physician-taken cervical smears in liquid-based medium. However, solid-state specimen carriers allow easy, non-hazardous storage and transportation and might be suitable for self-collection by non-responders in screening and in low-resource settings. ObjectivesWe evaluated the adequacy of self-collected cervicovaginal (c/v) samples using a Viba-brush stored on an Indicating FTA-elute cartridge (FTA-based self-sampling) for hrHPV testing in women referred to a gynecology clinic due to an abnormal smear. Study design182 women accepted to self-collect a c/v sample. After self-sampling, a physician obtained a conventional liquid-based cervical smear. Finally, women were examined by colposcopy and a biopsy was taken when clinically indicated. Self-samples required only simple DNA elution, and DNA was extracted from physician-obtained samples. Both samples were tested for 14 hrHPVs by GP5+/6+-EIA-LQ Test and SPF10-DEIA-LiPA25. ResultsBoth assays detected significantly more hrHPV in physician-collected specimens than in self-collected samples (75.3% and 67.6% by SPF10; 63.3% and 53.3% by GP5+/6+, respectively). The combination of physician-collected specimen and GP5+/6+ testing demonstrated the optimal balance in sensitivity (98.0%) and specificity (48.1%) for CIN2+ detection in this referral population. A test system of FTA-based self-collection and SPF10 hrHPV detection approached this sensitivity (95.9%) and specificity (42.9%). ConclusionsThese results show that the clinical performance of hrHPV detection is determined by both the sample collection system and the test method. FTA-based self-collection with SPF10 testing might be valuable when a liquid-based medium cannot be used, but requires further investigation in screening populations.

Improved sensitivity of vaginal self‐collection and high‐risk human papillomavirus testing

Self-collected vaginal specimens tested for high-risk human papillomavirus (HR-HPV) have been shown to be less sensitive for the detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia or cancer (≥CIN 3) than physician-collected endocervical specimens. To increase the sensitivity of self-collected specimens, we studied a self-sampling device designed to obtain a larger specimen from the upper vagina (POI/NIH self-sampler) and a more sensitive polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based HR-HPV assay. Women (10,000) were screened with cervical cytology and HR-HPV testing of vaginal self-collected and endocervical physician-collected specimens. Women were randomly assigned to use either a novel self-collection device (POI/NIH self-sampler) or conical-shaped brush (Qiagen). The self-collected and clinician-collected specimens were assayed by Cervista (Hologic) and the research only PCR-based matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization time-of-flight (MALDI-TOF). Women with any abnormal screening test underwent colposcopy and biopsy. Women (8,556), mean age of 38.9, had complete data; 1.6% had ≥ CIN 3. For either HR-HPV assay, the sensitivity was similar for the two self-collection devices. Tested with Cervista, the sensitivity for ≥CIN 3 of self-collected specimens was 70.9% and for endocervical specimens was 95.0% (p = 0.0001). Tested with MALDI-TOF, the sensitivity for ≥CIN 3 of self-collected specimens was 94.3% and for endocervical specimens was also 94.3% (p = 1.0). A self-collected sample using a PCR-based assay with the capability of very high throughput has similar sensitivity as a direct endocervical specimen obtained by a physician. Large population-based screening "events" in low-resource settings could be achieved by promoting self-collection and centralized high-throughput, low-cost testing by PCR-based MALDI-TOF.

Patient self-collection of group B streptococcal specimens during pregnancy.

In the United States, universal screening for group B streptococcal (GBS) colonization is recommended at 35 to 37 weeks' gestation. Previous studies have shown equivalent detection rates for GBS when women receive uniform instruction about specimen collection. It is unclear if these results would hold among patients with limited education given minimal, nonuniform instruction about collection technique. A retrospective analysis of GBS culture results for physicians who practice universal patient self-collection of specimens were compared with GBS culture results for physicians who personally routinely collect the specimens at 2 sites within a community health center network. For self-collection, medical assistant staff provided minimal instruction to patients about collection technique and without a protocol. Patients in both groups were primarily Hispanic and of lower socioeconomic status. Patient self-collection occurred in 293 of 800 specimens (36.6%). GBS was detected in 13.31% of patient self-collected samples and 10.65% of physician-collected specimens (relative risk, 1.25; 95% CI, 0.85-1.84). The study had 90% power to detect a 10% difference in colonization rates. Patient self-collection with minimal instruction is not inferior to physician collection of specimens at detecting GBS colonization in a majority Hispanic population of lower socioeconomic status.

Comparison of Patient- and Physician-Collected Specimens to Screen for Anal Cancer

Comparison of Patient- and Physician-Collected Specimens to Screen for Anal Cancer

Evaluation of HPV 16 PCR Detection in Self-compared With Clinician-collected Samples in Women Referred for Colposcopy

Abstract Objectives. A clinical prospective evaluation study was conducted to evaluate PCR detection of high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) type 16 in self-sampled vaginal compared with clinician-collected cervical specimens. Methods. Paired vaginal and cervical specimens were collected from 137 consecutive women referred for colposcopy because of abnormal cervical cytology. In-house and a commercial PCR method for HPV type 16 were used. Self-sampled vaginal HPV 16 detection was compared to histology and physician-collected cervical specimens. Results. Of the 137 patients, 98 had proven abnormal histology and were included in the analysis. Overall, using the cervix HPV detection as reference method, the self-sampled vaginal sample showed sensitivity 91.8%, specificity 96.1% and agreement kappa (κ) 0.881. Using the histology as reference, all 11 cervical cancer cases were HPV-16-positive in both cervical and vaginal samples, and in 43 high-grade lesions, detection sensitivity in cervix was 72.1% (κ 0.588) and vagina 67.4% (κ 0.516). HPV 16 detection did not differ (P = 0.27) between clinician-collected cervical and self-sampled vaginal specimens. Conclusions. The self-collected vaginal sample is highly concordant with the physician-collected cervical sample in HPV 16 detection.

Comparison of Physician- and Self-Collected Genital Specimens for Detection of Human Papillomavirus in Men

There is currently no consensus regarding the most appropriate methods of sampling for the detection of genital human papillomavirus (HPV) in men. We employed a recently developed collection method involving abrasion and moistened swabbing of the genital skin surface for the detection of HPV in a cohort of 136 university-affiliated males in Hawaii. Genital specimens collected by physicians using this method were compared with self-collected specimens from the same individuals obtained 24 h later. Self-collected specimens yielded a greater proportion of sufficient specimens than physician-collected specimens. HPV detection was comparable in physician- and self-collected specimens; detection was highest in the penile shaft (51.2% and 51.5%, respectively, P = 0.96), followed by the scrotum (41.2% and 46.2%, P = 0.43), the glans/coronal sulcus (31.9% and 33.1%, P = 0.84), and the foreskin (33.3% and 28.6%, P = 0.74). Site-specific agreement in HPV detection between paired physician- and self-collected samples ranged from 67.2% (kappa = 0.34) for the penile shaft to 95.0% (kappa = 0.89) for the foreskin. There was a high degree of concordance in HPV genotypes in HPV-positive pairs. The most common type was HPV type 84, which comprised approximately 15% of the specimens. The emery paper-swab method offers an efficient sampling method for genital HPV DNA detection in men that could be used both within and outside of the clinical setting.

Self-Sampling Is Associated with Increased Detection of Human Papillomavirus DNA in the Genital Tract of HIV-Seropositive Women

Analysis of self-collected swab samples from the genital tract could improve accrual and retention of women in studies of human papillomavirus (HPV) infection and precancerous cervical lesions. Self-collected vaginal swab specimens and physician-collected cervical swab specimens were compared for detection and typing of HPV DNA in 158 HIV-seropositive women. Paired samples were collected for 157 participants. Beta-globin was not detected in 6 (3.3%) physician-collected specimens and 8 (4.3%) self-obtained specimens collected from 11 women, leaving 146 paired samples suitable for PCR analysis. HPV DNA was amplified with the HPV primers PGMY09 and PGMY11 and typed using the line blot assay. HPV DNA was detected more frequently in self-collected samples (95 [65.1%] of 146), compared with physician-collected samples (78 [53.4%] of 146) (P = .04). Self-collected samples contained a greater number of types (mean +/- SD, 1.60 +/- 1.80 types; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.31-1.90), compared with physician-collected samples (mean +/- SD, 1.25 +/- 1.66 types; 95% CI, 0.98-1.52) (P = .04). A good agreement between sampling methods was achieved for detection of any HPV DNA (kappa = 0.73; 95% CI, 0.58-0.89), high-risk types (kappa = 0.84; 95% CI, 0.68-0.99), and low-risk types (kappa = 0.71; 95% CI, 0.67-0.75). Agreement between sampling methods for detection of HPV DNA was found for 24 (88.8%) of 27 follow-up samples collected from a total of 20 women. A comparison of samples collected at consecutive visits revealed agreements for detection of any HPV DNA, detection of high-risk HPV, and HPV typing results between visits of 88.9% (24 of 27 samples), 81.5% (22 of 27), and 55.5% (15 of 27), respectively, for physician-collected samples, and 96.3% (26 of 27 samples), 92.6% (25 of 27), and 55.5% (15 of 27), respectively, for self-collected samples. Analysis of self-collected vaginal swab samples improved the detection rate of HPV, suggesting that such samples might be of greater value than physician-obtained samples in studies of HPV transmission.

Comparison of type-specific human papillomavirus data from self and clinician directed sampling

Objective(s) To compare the type-specific human papillomavirus (HPV) recovery from physician and patient-collected samples. Methods Three hundred thirty-four (334) women attending colposcopy clinics in three countries were enrolled in this cross-sectional study. Cervicovaginal samples were collected by patients and physicians and processed with polymerase chain reaction and reverse line blot genotyping. McNemar's Chi-squared tests and Kappa statistics were utilized to determine statistical associations between physician- versus patient-collected samples. Results Oncogenic HPV infection was identified in 23.2% of patient-collected specimens compared to 34.9% of physician-collected specimens. Physician sampling detected significantly more infections with type 16 and 52 than did self-sampling and significantly more oncogenic HPV infection overall. For non-oncogenic HPV detection, there was no statistical difference between physician- and patient-collected samples. Conclusion(s) Patient sampling for HPV using a single vaginal brush does not identify all oncogenic HPV subtypes.

Self-Collection of Group B Streptococcus Cultures in Pregnant Women

This study assesses the sensitivity of self-collected rectovaginal culture specimens for group B Streptococcus by pregnant patients. A volunteer sample of 240 pregnant women at 28 weeks gestation self-collected rectovaginal culture swabs to screen for the presence of group B Streptococcus. The patients' physicians collected second specimens for comparison. Twenty-four of 240 women grew group B Streptococcus on at least one culture (incidence, 10%). Twenty physician-collected specimens and 19 patient-collected specimens were positive (83 and 79% sensitivity, respectively). Fifteen patients (62.5%) had both physician-collected and patient-collected cultures grow group B Streptococcus. Cohen's kappa (kappa = 0.75) indicates a high degree of agreement between patient-collected and physician-collected cultures. Pregnant women are as likely as their attending physicians to obtain positive cultures for group B Streptococcus by self-collection of rectovaginal swabs.