Women's Health Issues

“Am I Truly Invisible?”: A Qualitative Study on Black Women's Experiences of and Coping With Intersectional Invisibility in Uterine Fibroid Treatment

Black women are disproportionately burdened by uterine leiomyomas (fibroids) and face intersectional invisibility wherein their needs are ignored in health care settings due to sexism and racism. Our objective was to elucidate Black women's experiences in fibroid treatment and the strategies they use to protect their health and counter their intersectional invisibility. We recruited participants from the Fibroids Observational Research on Genes and the Environment (FORGE) Study. We conducted semistructured individual interviews (average length 45 minutes) on Black women's experiences in fibroid treatment. We analyzed the transcripts using a thematic analytical approach and intersectionality, a critical analytical framework that allows for the examination of how sexism and racism intersect to influence health inequities. Participants were 16 Black women aged 30-52 years who were seeking fibroid treatment in Washington, DC. Our analysis revealed that participants experience gendered racism (the intersection of sexism and racism) in fibroid treatment, mirroring a historical and ongoing pattern of how Black women are treated in health care settings, and that they manage their intersectional invisibility by engaging in strategies characteristic of the superwoman schema: projecting strength, suppressing emotions, resisting being dependent, and striving to succeed despite limited resources. Participants also highlighted that their ideal fibroid-related care would include a holistic approach and social support. Our findings emphasize that Black women's intersectional invisibility extends to fibroid treatment, reflecting the social-structural inequities that they face in health care settings more broadly. Attendance to Black women's voices in research and practice can help decrease their intersectional invisibility and subsequently improve their fibroid treatment and related health outcomes.

Reproductive Health Services in Abortion-Providing Clinics: A Scoping Review of Provision and Policy Contexts

Abortion-providing clinics often offer preventive reproductive health services. We conducted a scoping review to characterize provision of contraceptive care, sexually transmitted infection (STI) testing and/or treatment, and cervical cancer prevention and/or screening at U.S. abortion-providing clinics and to highlight policy drivers of variation in access to and provision of these services at the time of abortion by abortion-providing clinics. Researchers screened articles and extracted data from PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and CINAHL from inception through March 2023. Articles were eligible for review if they related contraceptive care, STI testing and/or treatment, or cervical cancer prevention and/or screening to abortion access, demand, or provision. Within these articles, we closely examined any discussion of health policy, conceptualized broadly based on existing literature describing policy associations with reproductive health care to identify policy drivers of reproductive health care provision in abortion care settings. A total of 5,359 articles were screened; 74 were included in the review. Sixty-five were about contraceptive care, seven on STI testing and/or treatment, and two on cervical cancer prevention and/or screening. Drivers of variation in provision of preventive reproductive health services included insurance and billing policies and regulatory requirements on abortion-providing facilities and clinicians. Existing data on the association between policies that restrict or protect abortion access and provision of preventive health services by abortion-providing clinics on a national scale are limited. Abortion-providing clinics are an access point for reproductive health services. Legislative trends to constrain abortion access may have spillover effects on provision of preventive reproductive health care such as contraceptive care, STI testing and/or treatment, and cervical cancer prevention and/or screening.

“It Feels Like Health Care with the Patient in Mind”: VA Patient and Staff Perspectives on Self-Collected HPV Testing

Self-collected testing for human papillomavirus (HPV) is poised to transform cervical cancer screening. Self-tests demonstrate similar accuracy to clinician-collected tests, but for the half a million women served by the Veterans Health Administration (VA) and their clinicians, self-collected cervical cancer screening would be a new practice. We examined VA patient and staff perspectives to inform future implementation. Semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted between 2021 and 2022 with female veterans receiving VA care (n = 22) and VA women's health nurses, clinicians, and administrators (n = 27). Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed. Interview questions addressed knowledge and interest, potential advantages or disadvantages, and any questions participants had about self-collected screening. Responses were analyzed using rapid qualitative methods. Five overarching themes were identified. Both patients and staff indicated high interest and enthusiasm for self-collected HPV testing, tempered by questions about test accuracy and logistical considerations. Familiarity with self-testing for other conditions such as colon-cancer screening or COVID made self-collection seem like a simple, convenient option. However, self-testing was not viewed as a good fit for all patients, and concerns about lost opportunities or missed incidental lesions were raised. Patients and staff described challenges with pelvic examinations for patients with past sexual trauma, particularly in the male-dominated VA environment. Pelvic exams can leave patients feeling vulnerable and exposed; self-collected testing was seen as a mechanism for patient empowerment. Veteran patients and VA staff shared common perspectives about potential advantages and disadvantages of self-collected HPV testing. Self-collected HPV testing has the potential to improve trauma-informed preventive health care for veterans.

Young Women's Perspectives on Being Screened for Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer Risk During Routine Primary Care

The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommends screening women to identify individuals eligible for genetic counseling based on a priori hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome (HBOC) risk (i.e., risk assessment). However, risk assessment has not been widely integrated into primary care. This qualitative study explored young women's views on implementing routine HBOC risk assessment with a focus on equity and patient-centeredness. We conducted group discussions with young women (aged 21-40 years) receiving care in an integrated health care system. Discussion groups occurred in two phases and used a modified deliberative approach that included a didactic component and prioritized developing consensus. Twenty women participated in one of three initial small group discussions (phase one). All 20 were invited to participate in a subsequent large group discussion (phase two), and 15 of them attended. Key themes and recommendations were as follows. Risk assessment should be accessible, contextualized, and destigmatized to encourage participation and reduce anxiety, particularly for women who do not know their family history. Providers conducting risk assessments must be equipped to address women's informational needs, relieve emotionality, and plan next steps after positive screens. Finally, to minimize differential screening uptake, health care systems must prioritize equity in program design and contribute to external educational and outreach efforts. Young women see pragmatic opportunities for health systems to optimize HBOC screening implementation.

Sexual Orientation Differences in Cervical Cancer Prevention among a Cohort of U.S. Women

Although much has been published in recent years on differences in Papanicolaou (Pap) tests across sexual orientation, other aspects of cervical cancer prevention remain underexplored, such as human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination, HPV co-tests, or abnormal Pap tests. Data came from participants (aged 24-54 years) enrolled in an ongoing, longitudinal, U.S.-based cohort study, the Nurses' Health Study 3 (N = 12,175). Analyses were restricted to participants who met the current guidelines for care (e.g., ≥21 years of age for Pap tests). Mostly heterosexual women were more likely to initiate HPV vaccination than completely heterosexual women with no same-sex partners. All other comparisons across sexual orientation for HPV vaccination initiation and completion and the age of initiation were not statistically significant. Compared with completely heterosexual women with no same-sex partners, mostly heterosexual and lesbian women had lower odds of having a Pap test within the past 2 years. Completely heterosexual women with same-sex partners, mostly heterosexual women, and bisexual women had their first Pap test at an earlier age, had higher odds of having an HPV co-test, and had higher odds of having a positive HPV or abnormal Pap test compared with completely heterosexual women with no same-sex partners. In contrast, lesbian women had lower odds of having positive HPV or abnormal Pap results (odds ratio, 0.65; 95% confidence interval, 0.49-0.86) than completely heterosexual women with no same-sex partners. There are significant differences across sexual orientation groups in cervical cancer prevention for Pap test timing and positive HPV and abnormal Pap tests, but few differences in HPV vaccination initiation, completion, and age at initiation. Interventions should focus on increasing routine Pap testing among mostly heterosexual and lesbian women.

Latinx Immigrant Mothers’ Perceived Self-Efficacy and Intentions Regarding Human Papillomavirus Vaccination of Their Daughters

Racial and ethnic disparities persist in cervical cancer cases, 90% of which are caused by the human papillomavirus (HPV). Suboptimal vaccine uptake is problematic, particularly among Latinx women, who have the highest cervical cancer incidence compared with other racial/ethnic groups. We examined the association of self-efficacy and HPV vaccination intention among Latinx immigrant mothers of unvaccinated 9- to 12-year-old girls. An interviewer-administered survey assessed baseline sociodemographic information, knowledge and perceived risk of cervical cancer and HPV, self-efficacy, and intention to vaccinate among 313 Latinx immigrant mothers in Alabama from 2013 to 2017 before the implementation of an intervention to promote HPV vaccination. Participants were, on average, 35 years old, with 9 years of education, and had lived in the United States for 12 years. Mothers who perceived their daughters were at risk of HPV infection were more likely to be vaccine intent than their hesitant counterparts (p < .001). Vaccine hesitancy was more common in those with lower education, low HPV and cervical cancer knowledge, and lower perceived self-efficacy scores (p < .001). Self-efficacy was associated with vaccine intention when controlling for other variables (p < .001). The only variable associated with self-efficacy was HPV awareness (p = .001). Programs promoting HPV vaccination among Latinx immigrants should include educational components regarding risks of HPV infection and cervical cancers in addition to information regarding access to vaccination services. Knowledge of risks and access may heighten perceptions of self-efficacy and improve vaccine uptake among this population.

Coverage for the Entire Cervical Cancer Screening Process Without Cost-Sharing: Lessons From Colorectal Cancer Screening

Factors Associated With Guideline-Concordant Cervical Cancer Screening Exit: A Mixed Methods Study

More than 20% of cervical cancers are diagnosed in women older than 65 years. Guidelines recommend screening exit at age 65 for average-risk patients only if certain criteria are met, yet most women aged 64-66 years in the United States are inadequately screened. In this mixed methods study, we explored clinician knowledge of exit criteria. We explored factors associated with clinician-reported guideline-concordant screening exit, as well as facilitators and barriers to appropriate cervical cancer screening exit. Guideline concordance required that clinicians be aware that patients can exit screening if they have received a hysterectomy for benign reasons or had either three consecutive negative Pap tests or two consecutive negative human papilloma virus tests-and that they should not exit screening if they have a history of precancer treatment in the prior 25 years. In 2021, a national sample of 1,251 clinicians completed surveys; a subset (n = 55) completed qualitative interviews. Although most (>70%) correctly identified criteria related to hysterectomy and prior negative screening requirements, only 35% of participants (n = 434) responded correctly to all screening exit items. In logistic regression models, male clinicians, OB/GYNs, and those in academic or hospital-based practices were more likely to respond correctly. Interview responses indicated variable understanding of the nuances of exit criteria. Those who continued screening patients past age 65 cited concerns related to new sexual partners and missing cancers. Several providers noted difficulty accessing adequate records. Clinicians who routinely perform cervical cancer screening have knowledge gaps around exit criteria and also describe difficulty applying the criteria in practice. As fewer women undergo hysterectomy and life expectancy increases, the number of individuals older than 65 at risk for cervical cancer will continue to rise. Adjusting guidelines to decrease the complexity of exit criteria should be considered.

A Scoping Review of Cervical Cancer Risk Factors, Prevention, Diagnosis, and Treatment in U.S. Active Duty Military Women

Maintaining military readiness requires integration and delivery of appropriate sex-specific health care services for active duty servicewomen (ADSW). Cervical cancer screening (CCS) provides early detection, intervention, and treatment, allowing for reductions in human papillomavirus (HPV) infections and cervical cancer cases. This scoping review examines existing cervical cancer evidence related to ADSW and identifies research gaps, leverage points, and policy recommendations within the context of the social ecological model for military women's health. We conducted a scoping literature search using both indexed databases and nonindexed sources. We managed retrieved records from 2000 to 2018 with Endnote reference and DistillerSR systematic review software. Of 1,006 records from indexed databases and 208 records from nonindexed resources retrieved, 40 publications met the inclusion criteria. Cervical cancer research addressing ADSW is limited. Servicewomen have high rates of known cancer risk factors and face challenges related to deployments and change of duty station that affect continuity of health care and timely follow-up for abnormal CCS. Multimodal interventions with stakeholder support can encourage CCS adherence and increase HPV vaccination rates. Maintaining military readiness among ADSW requires robust evidence-based prevention efforts to address risk factors that are reportedly higher among servicewomen, as well as challenges to continuity in health care delivery that may increase the likelihood of cervical cancer incidence. Recognizing the role of HPV vaccination as cancer prevention, collaborations and partnerships, research, best practices, and creative solutions to close ADSW's sex-specific health gaps will help to ensure a fit and ready force.

Health Care Provider Willingness to Recommend Self-collected Tests for Human Papillomavirus: A Mixed Methods Examination of Associated Factors

Cervical cancer disproportionately affects those who are underscreened. Human papillomavirus self-collection is a promising tool to expand screening. Study objectives were to examine 1) factors (provider characteristics and practice type) associated with and 2) attitudes (perceived benefits and concerns) toward using human papillomavirus self-collection for cervical cancer screening in clinical practice. This study had a mixed method design; prior to regulatory approval of self-collection, we conducted a national survey and interviews of health care providers who perform cervical cancer screening. Quantitative measures included provider and practice characteristics, willingness to recommend, and preferences related to self-collection. Qualitative interviews further elucidated provider perspectives. A total of 1,251 providers completed surveys, and 56 completed interviews. Among survey respondents, 33.4% reported they were likely to offer self-collection, 28.6% were unsure, and 38.0% reported they were unlikely. Most would offer self-collection either in the clinic or at home per patient preference. Male participants, advanced practice providers, internal and family physicians, and those practicing in academic medical center, hospital, or community health settings were more likely than female participants, obstetrician-gynecologist physicians, and those in private practice to indicate they were likely to offer self-collection. Concerns expressed in both surveys and interviews included the adequacy of sample collection and the ability to follow up. Respondents felt that self-collection would be particularly beneficial for those who did not have access to clinician-collected screening, as well as for patients who may have difficulty with pelvic examinations for any reason. Providers considered human papillomavirus self-collection to be a way to expand access for patients with health care barriers and pelvic examination difficulties. They had concerns related to sample adequacy and follow-up after abnormal results.

Factors Associated With Guideline-concordant and Excessive Cervical Cancer Screening: A Mixed Methods Study

National guidelines recommend cervical cancer screening with Papanicolaou (Pap) testing at 3-year intervals or with human papillomavirus (HPV) testing alone or HPV/Pap cotesting at 5-year intervals for average-risk individuals aged 30-65 years. We explored factors associated with clinician-reported guideline-concordant screening, as well as facilitators and barriers to appropriate cervical cancer screening. A national sample of clinicians (N = 1,251) completed surveys; a subset (n = 55) completed interviews. Most (94%) reported that they screened average-risk patients aged 30-65 years with cotesting. Nearly all clinicians who were categorized as nonadherent to national guidelines were overscreening (98%). Guideline concordant screening was reported by 47% and 82% of those using cotesting and HPV testing, respectively (5-year intervals), and by 62% of those using Pap testing only (3-year intervals). Concordant screening was reported more often by clinicians who were aged <40 years, non-Hispanic, and practicing in the West or Midwest, and less often by obstetrician-gynecologists and private practice physicians. Concordant screening was facilitated by beliefs that updated guidelines were evidence-based and reduced harms, health care system dissemination of guidelines, and electronic medical record prompts. Barriers to concordant screening included using outdated guidelines, relying on personal judgment, concern about missing cancers, inappropriate patient risk assessment, and lack of support for guideline adoption through health care systems or electronic medical records. Most clinicians screened with Pap/HPV cotesting and approximately one-half endorsed a 5-year screening interval. Clinician knowledge gaps include understanding the evidence underlying 5-year intervals and appropriate risk assessment to determine which patients should be screened more frequently. Education and tracking systems can promote guideline-concordant screening.

Impacts of the Affordable Care Act on Receipt of Women's Preventive Services in Community Health Centers in Medicaid Expansion and Nonexpansion States

The Affordable Care Act (ACA) increased health insurance coverage throughout the United States and improved care delivery for some services. We assess whether ACA implementation and Medicaid expansion were followed by greater receipt of recommended preventive services among women and girls in a large network of community health centers. Using electronic health record data from 354 community health centers in 14 states (10 expansion, 4 nonexpansion), we used generalized estimating equations and difference-in-difference methods to compare receipt of six recommended preventive services (cervical cancer screening, human papilloma virus vaccination, chlamydia screening, influenza vaccination, human immunodeficiency virus screening, and blood pressure screening) among active female patients ages 11 to 65 (N = 711,121) before and after ACA implementation and between states that expanded versus did not expand Medicaid. Except for blood pressure screening, receipt of all examined preventive services increased after ACA implementation in both Medicaid expansion and nonexpansion states. Influenza vaccination and blood pressure screening increased more in expansion states (adjusted absolute prevalence difference-in-difference, 1.55; 95% confidence interval, 0.51-2.60; and 1.98; 95% confidence interval, 0.91-3.05, respectively). Chlamydia screening increased more in nonexpansion states (adjusted absolute prevalence difference-in-difference: -4.21; 95% confidence interval, -6.98 to -1.45). Increases in cervical cancer screening, human immunodeficiency virus screening, and human papilloma virus vaccination did not differ significantly between expansion and nonexpansion states. Among female patients at community health centers, receipt of recommended preventive care improved after ACA implementation in both Medicaid expansion and nonexpansion states, although the overall rates remained low. Continued support is needed to overcome barriers to preventive care in this population.

“I Thought It Was Just For Teenagers”: Knowledge, Attitudes, and Beliefs about HPV Vaccination Among Women Aged 27 to 45

We aimed to identify human papillomavirus (HPV) and HPV vaccine-related knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs among women aged 27-45 years, who became eligible for HPV vaccination in 2018. Eight virtual focus groups were conducted with 52 unvaccinated cisgender women aged 27-45 years living in Southern California's Inland Empire. Themes related to women's knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs were systematically identified using the rigorous and accelerated data reduction technique. The sample was diverse: 62% of participants were Hispanic, Black, or Asian; 17% identified as lesbian or bisexual; and annual household incomes ranged from $0 to $260,000 (median, $60,500). Key qualitative themes centered on 1) questions about HPV and HPV vaccination, 2) knowledge and beliefs about HPV and HPV vaccination, 3) concerns about vaccine side effects and safety, 4) low perceived benefits of vaccination, and 5) social factors influencing vaccine acceptance. Few participants were aware adults aged 27-45 years are eligible for HPV vaccination or that vaccination can still be beneficial after sexual debut. Many believed HPV vaccination caused serious side effects among adolescents and questioned whether safety had been adequately studied for newly eligible adults. Although many participants associated HPV vaccination with social stigma, some emphasized that vaccination was a way to exercise control over their health and prevent illness, given they could not always control the actions of their sexual contacts. Findings provide insight into knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs about HPV and HPV vaccination among women aged 27-45 years, which may be useful for informing interventions to promote shared clinical decision-making between patients and health providers.