Antenatal care (ANC) has the potential to identify and manage obstetric complications, educate women about risks during pregnancy and promote skilled birth attendance during childbirth. The aim of this study was to assess women’s knowledge of obstetric danger signs and factors associated with this knowledge in Ambanja, Madagascar. It also sought to evaluate whether the participation in a mobile health (mHealth) project that aimed to provide comprehensive ANC to pregnant women in remote areas influenced women’s knowledge of obstetric danger signs. From April to October 2015, a non-random, convenience sample of 372 women in their first year postpartum were recruited, including 161 who had participated in the mHealth project. Data were analyzed using bivariate and multivariate logistic regression. Knowledge of at least one danger sign varied from 80.9% of women knowing danger sign(s) in pregnancy, to 51.9%, 50.8% and 53.2% at delivery, postpartum and in the newborn, respectively. Participation in the mHealth intervention, higher household income, and receipt of information about danger signs during pregnancy were associated with knowledge of danger signs during delivery, in bivariate analysis; only higher household income and mHealth project participation were independently associated. Higher educational attainment and receipt of information about danger signs in antenatal care were associated with significantly higher odds of knowing danger sign(s) for the newborn in both bivariate and multivariate analysis. Knowledge of obstetric danger signs is low. Information provision during pregnancy and with mHealth is promising. This trial was retrospectively registered at the International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Register (identifier ISRCTN15798183 ; August 22, 2015).

The use of thermocoagulation for the treatment of cervical precancerous lesions has recently generated a great deal of interest. Our aim was to determine the feasibility of this outpatient procedure in the context of a cervical cancer (CC) screen-and-treat campaign in sub-Saharan Africa. Between July and December 2015, women living in the area of Dschang (Cameroon) aged between 30 and 49 years, were enrolled in a CC screening study. HPV self-sampling was performed as a primary screening test and women who were either “HPV 16/18/45-positive” or “positive to other HPV types and to VIA” were considered screen-positive, thus requiring further management. The primary outcome was the percentage of screen-positive patients who met the criteria to undergo thermocoagulation. The secondary outcome was the assessment of the procedure’s side effects immediately after treatment and at the 1-month follow-up visit. A total of 1012 women were recruited in the study period. Among 121 screen-positive women, 110 of them (90.9%) were eligible to be treated with thermocoagulation. No patients discontinued treatment because of pain or other side effects. The mean ± SD (Standard Deviation) score measured on the 10-point Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) was 3.0 ± 1.6. Women having less than 2 children were more likely to report a higher pain score than those with more than two (4.2 ± 2.0 versus 2.9 ± 1.5, respectively; p value = 0.016). A total of 109/110 (99.1%) patients came to the 1-month follow-up visit. Vaginal discharge was reported in 108/109 (99.1%) patients throughout the month following treatment. Three patients (2.8%) developed vaginal infection requiring local antibiotics. No hospitalizations were required. The majority of screen-positive women met the criteria and could be treated by thermocoagulation. The procedure was associated to minor side effects and is overall feasible in the context of a CC screen-and-treat campaign in sub-Saharan Africa. The trial was retrospectively registered on November 11, 2015 with the identifier: ISRCTN99459678 .

Human papillomavirus (HPV) self-sampling (Self-HPV) is a promising strategy to improve cervical cancer screening coverage in low-income countries. However, issues associated with women who prefer conventional HPV clinical-sampling over HPV self-sampling may affect screening participation. To address this issue, our study assessed factors associated with women’s preferences related to Self-HPV. This study was embedded in a large clinical trial recruiting women aged 30–49 years in a primary HPV-based study termed “3T-Approach” (for Test-Triage-Treatment), launched in 2018 at Dschang District Hospital, West Cameroon. Participants were invited to perform a Self-HPV. After the sampling and before receiving the results, participants completed a questionnaire about cervical cancer screening and their preferences and perceptions around Self-HPV. The median age of the 2201 participants was 40.6 (IQR 35–45) years. Most (1693 (76.9%)) preferred HPV self-sampling or had no preference for either method, and 508 (23.1%) preferred clinician-sampling. Factors associated with an increased likelihood of reporting a clinician-sampling preference were tertiary educational level (29.4% CI: 25.6–33.6 vs. 14.4% CI: 12.8–16.1) and being an employee with higher grade professional or managerial occupations (5.5% CI: 3.8–7.9 vs. 2.7% CI: 2.0–3.5). The main reported reason for women preferring clinician-sampling was a lack of “self-expertise”. Most women (>99%) would agree to repeat HPV self-sampling and would recommend it to their relatives. HPV self-sampling in the cultural context of central Africa was well accepted by participants, but some participants would prefer to undergo clinician sampling. Health systems should support well-educated women to increase self-confidence in using HPV self-sampling.

Background: To evaluate if human papillomavirus (HPV) self-sampling (Self-HPV) using a dry vaginal swab is a valid alternative for HPV testing. Methods: Women attending colposcopy clinic were recruited to collect two consecutive Self-HPV samples: a Self-HPV using a dry swab (S-DRY) and a Self-HPV using a standard wet transport medium (S-WET). These samples were analyzed for HPV using real time PCR (Roche Cobas). Participants were randomized to determine the order of the tests. Questionnaires assessing preferences and acceptability for both tests were conducted. Subsequently, women were invited for colposcopic examination; a physician collected a cervical sample (physician-sampling) with a broom-type device and placed it into a liquid-based cytology medium. Specimens were then processed for the production of cytology slides and a Hybrid Capture HPV DNA test (Qiagen) was performed from the residual liquid. Biopsies were performed if indicated. Unweighted kappa statistics (к) and McNemar tests were used to measure the agreement among the sampling methods. Results: A total of 120 women were randomized. Overall HPV prevalence was 68.7% (95% Confidence Interval (CI) 59.3–77.2) by S-WET, 54.4% (95% CI 44.8–63.9) by S-DRY and 53.8% (95% CI 43.8–63.7) by HC. Among paired samples (S-WET and S-DRY), the overall agreement was good (85.7%; 95% CI 77.8–91.6) and the κ was substantial (0.70; 95% CI 0.57-0.70). The proportion of positive type-specific HPV agreement was also good (77.3%; 95% CI 68.2-84.9). No differences in sensitivity for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade one (CIN1) or worse between the two Self-HPV tests were observed. Women reported the two Self-HPV tests as highly acceptable. Conclusion: Self-HPV using dry swab transfer does not appear to compromise specimen integrity. Further study in a large screening population is needed. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01316120

Visual inspection with acetic acid (VIA) is one of the methods recommended by the World Health Organization for cervical cancer screening. VIA is simple and low-cost; it, however, presents high subjectivity. We conducted a systematic literature search in PubMed, Google Scholar and Scopus to identify automated algorithms for classifying images taken during VIA as negative (healthy/benign) or precancerous/cancerous. Of the 2608 studies identified, 11 met the inclusion criteria. The algorithm with the highest accuracy in each study was selected, and some of its key features were analyzed. Data analysis and comparison between the algorithms were conducted, in terms of sensitivity and specificity, ranging from 0.22 to 0.93 and 0.67 to 0.95, respectively. The quality and risk of each study were assessed following the QUADAS-2 guidelines. Artificial intelligence-based cervical cancer screening algorithms have the potential to become a key tool for supporting cervical cancer screening, especially in settings where there is a lack of healthcare infrastructure and trained personnel. The presented studies, however, assess their algorithms using small datasets of highly selected images, not reflecting whole screened populations. Large-scale testing in real conditions is required to assess the feasibility of integrating those algorithms in clinical settings.