Objective: Self-sampled human papillomavirus (HPV) testing is a potential option for cervical cancer screening, but research is scarce in Cambodia. We evaluated the feasibility, accuracy, and acceptability of self-sampled HPV testing using careHPV. Methods: A cross-sectional study including women aged 20–49 years attending 2 national hospitals in the capital city was conducted. Women underwent both self-sampling and clinician-sampling of specimens, and were then asked to complete an acceptability questionnaire. The paired samples were analyzed for high-risk HPV by careHPV and genotyped by polymerase chain reaction (PCR). Results: A total of 375 women were eligible for inclusion. Based on PCR, 78.9% were negative for HPV in both self and clinician-samples, 9.9% had a complete HPV type match, and 6.1% had all HPV types in clinician-samples also detected in self-samples. In 5.1%, one or more HPV types identified in the clinician-samples were missed in self-samples. When using careHPV, the overall agreement between the 2 sampling methods was 95.7% (95% confidence interval [CI]=95.8–95.6) with good concordance (κ=0.66, 95% CI=0.56–0.76). Nearly 90% of the women preferred clinician-sampling over self-sampling, citing greater comfort, ease, and speed. Conclusion Self-sampled HPV testing using careHPV could be an option for cervical cancer screening in Cambodia; however, it requires periodic quality control of handling procedures.In addition, women’s health education regarding the accuracy of self-sampled HPV testing and the importance of follow-up in cases of positive results is needed.

Objective: Self-sampled human papillomavirus (HPV) testing is a potential option for cervical cancer screening, but research is scarce in Cambodia. We evaluated the feasibility, accuracy, and acceptability of self-sampled HPV testing using careHPV. Methods: A cross-sectional study including women aged 20–49 years attending 2 national hospitals in the capital city was conducted. Women underwent both self-sampling and clinician-sampling of specimens, and were then asked to complete an acceptability questionnaire. The paired samples were analyzed for high-risk HPV by careHPV and genotyped by polymerase chain reaction (PCR). Results: A total of 375 women were eligible for inclusion. Based on PCR, 78.9% were negative for HPV in both self and clinician-samples, 9.9% had a complete HPV type match, and 6.1% had all HPV types in clinician-samples also detected in self-samples. In 5.1%, one or more HPV types identified in the clinician-samples were missed in self-samples. When using careHPV, the overall agreement between the 2 sampling methods was 95.7% (95% confidence interval [CI]=95.8–95.6) with good concordance (κ=0.66, 95% CI=0.56–0.76). Nearly 90% of the women preferred clinician-sampling over self-sampling, citing greater comfort, ease, and speed. Conclusion Self-sampled HPV testing using careHPV could be an option for cervical cancer screening in Cambodia; however, it requires periodic quality control of handling procedures.In addition, women’s health education regarding the accuracy of self-sampled HPV testing and the importance of follow-up in cases of positive results is needed.

Objective: Self-sampled human papillomavirus (HPV) testing is a potential option for cervical cancer screening, but research is scarce in Cambodia. We evaluated the feasibility, accuracy, and acceptability of self-sampled HPV testing using careHPV. Methods: A cross-sectional study including women aged 20–49 years attending 2 national hospitals in the capital city was conducted. Women underwent both self-sampling and clinician-sampling of specimens, and were then asked to complete an acceptability questionnaire. The paired samples were analyzed for high-risk HPV by careHPV and genotyped by polymerase chain reaction (PCR). Results: A total of 375 women were eligible for inclusion. Based on PCR, 78.9% were negative for HPV in both self and clinician-samples, 9.9% had a complete HPV type match, and 6.1% had all HPV types in clinician-samples also detected in self-samples. In 5.1%, one or more HPV types identified in the clinician-samples were missed in self-samples. When using careHPV, the overall agreement between the 2 sampling methods was 95.7% (95% confidence interval [CI]=95.8–95.6) with good concordance (κ=0.66, 95% CI=0.56–0.76). Nearly 90% of the women preferred clinician-sampling over self-sampling, citing greater comfort, ease, and speed. Conclusion Self-sampled HPV testing using careHPV could be an option for cervical cancer screening in Cambodia; however, it requires periodic quality control of handling procedures.In addition, women’s health education regarding the accuracy of self-sampled HPV testing and the importance of follow-up in cases of positive results is needed.