Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Department of Community and Family Medicine, University of Missouri Kansas City School of Medicine, Kansas City, Missouri, United States of America; University of Missouri-Kansas City Student Health and Wellness, University of Missouri-Kansas City, Kansas City, Missouri, United States of America.
Published: October 2015
AI Article Synopsis
Article Abstract
Background: HPV vaccination programs have adversely affected participation in future cervical cancer screening. The purpose of this study is to determine the influence of decision satisfaction with accepting/rejecting the HPV vaccine, as well as traditional clinical factors, on the intent to participate in future screening.
Methods And Findings: From January 2011 through August 2012 women 18-26 years old presenting for health care in an urban college student health and wellness clinic in the US Midwest were asked to complete a descriptive and medical history survey including a six element decisional satisfaction survey scored on 5-point Likert scales, where the intent to participate in future cervical cancer screening was measured. Of the 568 women who completed the decisional satisfaction survey, 17% of those <21 years and 7% ≥ 21 years indicated no intent to participate in future cervical cancer screenings. Among women of current screening age, the univariate risk factors of race/ethnicity, contraceptive use, number of lifetime sexual partners, and receipt of HPV vaccine were not predictors of intent for future cervical cancer screening. Instead, only a history of a prior Pap test was a significant positive predictor and only a decisional satisfaction of 'neutral' (Likert score = 3) for any of the four decisional satisfaction elements was a significant negative predictor. For the decisional satisfaction element "best for me personally", there was a 78% decreased likelihood of intending to participate in future screening if the satisfaction was neutral rather than firm (aOR = 0.22, 95% CI: 0.05-0.91) and a 26 fold increased likelihood if she had had a prior Pap test (aOR = 26, 95% CI: 5-133).
Conclusions: HPV vaccination implementation programs must help women be the owner of their decision around HPV vaccination and understand the importance of future participation in cervical cancer screening.
