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

Clinician Characteristics Associated With Adoption of Updated National Colposcopy Guidelines

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate adherence to the 2019 ASCCP risk-based management consensus guidelines for management of patients following colpscopic cervical biopsy among US colposcopists.

METHODS

To elucidate factors associated with utilization of the 2019 guidelines for patients undergoing colposcopic cervical biopsy, the authors cross-sectionally surveyed physicians and advanced practice professionals who perform colposcopy. Clinicians responded to clinical vignettes describing scenarios for which management recommendations differed between 2019 and prior management guidelines. Vignette 1 involved deferral of repeat colposcopy for patients with a low-risk biopsy, HPV, and cytology results. Vignette 2 involved deferral of excisional treatment on a patient with repeated low-grade biopsy results. Binomial logistic regression models determined factors associated with utilization of 2019 guidelines.

RESULTS

A total of 670 colposcopists participated from across the United States. For Vignettes 1 and 2, guideline-adherent responses were given by 30.5% and 66.1% of participants, respectively. Colpsocopists practicing in community health centers were more likely to perform guideline-concordant care for Vignettes 1 and 2. Hispanic compared to non-Hispanic colposcopists and Internal or Family medicine compared to OB-GYN colposcopists are less likely to perform guideline-concordant care in Vignette 2. Irrespective of their chosen response, most believed they were guideline-adherent.

CONCLUSIONS

Many colposcopists may not realize their current management strategies are inconsistent with 2019 guidelines. Tailored education initiatives could address knowledge gaps, maximize patient benefits, and minimize harms.

A Mixed-Methods Study Examining Guideline-Concordant Colposcopy Practices Among a National Cohort of US Colposcopists

OBJECTIVES

The 2017 ASCCP Colposcopy Standards guidelines were designed to maximize the diagnostic yield of colposcopy. However, guideline adoption is often slow, and few studies have examined management of patients undergoing colposcopy.

METHODS

To elucidate factors associated with utilization of the 2017 ASCCP Colposcopy Standards guidelines for patients undergoing colposcopic cervical biopsy, the authors cross-sectionally surveyed and interviewed physicians and advanced practice providers who perform colposcopy. Clinicians responded to a clinical vignette describing a common colposcopy scenario. Clinicians were asked to describe where they would biopsy and why. Binomial logistic regression models determined factors associated with guideline concordance. Qualitative interviews further explored practice patterns.

RESULTS

A total of 671 colposcopists participated from across the United States. A total of 541 (81%) participants reported colposcopy practice concordant with the 2017 ASCCP Colposcopy Standards guidelines. A total of 490 (73%) participants reported that they were using the 2017 ASCCP Colposcopy Standards guidelines. Male colposcopists and those who were internal and family medicine clinicians were less likely to report guideline-concordant management than females and obstetrician-gynecologists. Colposcopists discussed the rationale behind guideline-concordant aspects of care, including taking targeted biopsies and using excisional rather than ablation procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

Most colposcopists perform biopsies and treatment consistent with the 2017 ASCCP Colposcopy Standards guidelines and understand the rationale behind multiple targeted biopsies.

Factors associated with willingness to perform expedited excisional treatment for patients at high risk for cervical precancer

Background

The 2019 ASCCP Risk-Based Management Consensus Guidelines prefer expedited treatment, defined as proceeding to excisional treatment without first performing colposcopic biopsy, for patients with screening results indicating a high risk of cervical precancer. In this mixed methods study, we explored clinician attitudes toward expedited treatment.

Methods

In 2021, a national sample of 671 clinicians who performed colposcopy completed surveys; a subset (n = 41) of clinicians who performed colposcopy and/or directed patient treatment completed qualitative interviews.

Results

Among 671 colposcopists, 25.7 % were currently performing expedited treatment, 50.8% were not currently using expedited treatment but were willing to adopt this change, and 23.6% were not willing to perform expedited treatment. Binomial regression analyses indicated that internal medicine and family medicine clinicians (compared to Obstetrician-Gynecologists), and those practicing in academic medal centers (compared to private practice) had higher odds of currently performing expedited treatment; internal and family medicine clinicians also reported higher odds of being willing to adopt this change. Qualitative interviews highlighted benefits including improved cancer prevention among older patients, reduced loss to follow-up, reduction of time and expense for patients, and allowing shared decision-making. Concerns expressed related to future pregnancy complications, lack of available excisional treatment services (e.g., LEEP), patient preference, avoiding over- and under-treatment, and using biopsy results to plan excisional procedures.

Conclusions

Approximately 25 % of colposcopists are currently performing expedited treatment, and an additional 50 % would be willing to adopt this practice for high-risk patients. Improving access to expedited treatment for appropriate patients could improve cervical cancer prevention.

Attitudes toward the American Cancer Society's 2020 cervical cancer screening guidelines: A qualitative study of a national sample of US clinicians

BACKGROUND

The 2020 American Cancer Society (ACS) guidelines are the most recent national guidelines for cervical cancer screening. These guidelines propose two major changes from current practice: initiating screening at age 25 years and using primary human papillomavirus (HPV) testing. Adoption of guidelines often occurs slowly, and therefore understanding clinician attitudes is important to facilitate practice change.

METHODS

Interviews with a national sample of clinicians who perform cervical cancer screening in a variety of settings explored attitudes toward the two major changes from the 2020 ACS cervical cancer screening guidelines. Clinicians participated in 30- to 60-min interviews exploring their attitudes toward various aspects of cervical cancer screening. Qualitative analysis was performed.

RESULTS

Seventy clinicians participated from across the United States. Few respondents were initiating screening at age 25 years, and none were using primary HPV testing. However, over half would be willing to adopt these practices if supported by scientific evidence and recommended by professional medical organizations. Barriers to adoption included the lack of endorsement by professional societies, lack of laboratory availability and insurance coverage, limited autonomy within large health care systems, and concerns related to missed disease.

CONCLUSIONS

Few clinicians have adopted screening initiation or primary HPV testing, as recommended by the 2020 ACS guidelines, but over half were open to adopting these changes. Implementation may be facilitated via professional organization endorsement, clinician education, and laboratory, health care system, and insurance support.

PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY

In 2020, the American Cancer Society (ACS) released updated guidelines for cervical cancer screening. The main changes to current practices were to initiate screening at age 25 years instead of age 21 years and to screen using primary human papillomavirus (HPV) testing rather than cytology alone or in combination with HPV testing. We performed in-depth interviews with 70 obstetrics and gynecology, family medicine, and internal medicine physicians and advanced practice providers about their attitudes toward these guidelines. Few clinicians are following the 2020 ACS guidelines, but over half were open to changing practice if the changes were supported by evidence and recommended by professional medical organizations. Barriers to adoption included the lack of endorsement by professional medical organizations, logistical issues, and concerns about missed disease.