Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 21, 2026
Chromogenic In Situ Hybridization as a Tool for HPV-Related Head and Neck Cancer Diagnosis
Published on: June 14, 2019
Women's preference for HPV self-sampling devices: a programme-embedded, large-scale paired comparative study within
Emilie Korsgaard Andreasen1, Alexander Arum2, Helle Pedersen2
1Department of Pathology, afs. 134, AHH-Hvidovre Hospital, Copenhagen University Hospital, Hvidovre, Denmark emilie.korsgaard.andreasen@regionh.dk.
Objective:
To demonstrate women's preferences for three human papillomavirus (HPV) self-sampling devices.
Design:
Cross-sectional, programme-embedded paired comparative study with randomised sampling order within device pairs.
Setting:
Organised cervical cancer screening programme in the Capital Region of Denmark.
Participants:
1760 women eligible for cervical cancer screening (April 2024 to May 2025), assigned to one of three groups: (1) Evalyn versus FLOQSwab (n=518), (2) Evalyn versus SensiGrip (n=657) and (3) FLOQSwab versus SensiGrip (n=585).
Outcome Measures:
Primary: device preference. Secondary: sampling-experience (self-reported). Data were assessed with χ² tests for preference, logistic regression for predictor analysis and Wilcoxon signed-rank equivalence test with two one-sided test procedures to assess sampling experience.
Results:
Overall, 95.7% rated HPV self-sampling a positive experience and 87.3% preferred HPV self-sampling in future screening. SensiGrip was preferred significantly over FLOQSwab (p<0.001), with participants rating ease of use and sampling certainty higher for SensiGrip. No significant differences in preference were observed between Evalyn and either alternative device in the primary analysis (p>0.05) although Evalyn scored higher in sampling certainty. Sampling order influenced preference in Evalyn comparisons. Prior experience with self-sampling, screening history and subcohort membership did not significantly influence device preference.
Conclusions:
Overall, participants rated self-sampling a positive experience. SensiGrip was preferred over FLOQSwab, while Evalyn demonstrated comparable overall acceptability to both alternative devices in the primary implementation-focused analysis. These findings suggest that device replacement would be acceptable from a screening participation perspective, particularly a shift from FLOQSwab to SensiGrip.
