Screening Guidelines and Programs for Cervical Cancer Control in Countries of Different Economic Groups: A Narrative Review. 2023

Jyoti Sharma, and Madhavi Yennapu, and Yamini Priyanka
Council of Scientific and Industrial Research-National Institute of Science Communication and Policy Research (CSIR-NIScPR), Academy of Scientific and Innovative Research (AcSIR), New Delhi, IND.

Screening guidelines and practices differ according to resource availability and continually update as scientific developments take place. In this article, we have reviewed screening guidelines and programs for cervical cancer prevention in selected countries belonging to different economic groups viz high income, middle income, and low income. We have selected six countries - the United States of America (USA), the United Kingdom (UK), India, South Africa, Bangladesh, and Malawi. Considerable differences are observed across the health systems. Countries with established screening guidelines complemented by organised nationwide programs or insurance practices have much better screening rates. Human Papilloma Virus (HPV) DNA testing is currently the test of choice in the majority of settings for cervical cancer screening due to its higher sensitivity (up to 90-100%) and longer screening intervals (three to five years). It is also cost-effective, less dependent on operator expertise, and suitable for all settings as compared to a Pap smear test or visual inspection with acetic acid (VIA). Self-sampling of HPV can further help to improve screening coverage by increasing opportunities of reaching to women who would otherwise not participate in screening programs. Resource-constrained countries recommend VIA-based screening in their national programs due to its low cost. The share of cervical cancer is higher in middle and low-income countries as they have lower screening coverage, compared to high-income countries. The main barriers faced in the implementation of the program in low-income countries (LICs) are pertaining to the health system, patient-specific challenges, and healthcare provider-specific challenges.

UI MeSH Term Description Entries

Related Publications

Jyoti Sharma, and Madhavi Yennapu, and Yamini Priyanka
September 2016, International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics,
Jyoti Sharma, and Madhavi Yennapu, and Yamini Priyanka
August 2022, Preventive medicine reports,
Jyoti Sharma, and Madhavi Yennapu, and Yamini Priyanka
May 2020, Journal of gynecologic oncology,
Jyoti Sharma, and Madhavi Yennapu, and Yamini Priyanka
January 2022, Clinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil),
Jyoti Sharma, and Madhavi Yennapu, and Yamini Priyanka
June 2021, Zhonghua yi xue za zhi,
Jyoti Sharma, and Madhavi Yennapu, and Yamini Priyanka
January 2023, Frontiers in public health,
Jyoti Sharma, and Madhavi Yennapu, and Yamini Priyanka
January 2016, North Carolina medical journal,
Jyoti Sharma, and Madhavi Yennapu, and Yamini Priyanka
August 2007, GMS health technology assessment,
Jyoti Sharma, and Madhavi Yennapu, and Yamini Priyanka
January 2011, Journal of cancer epidemiology,
Jyoti Sharma, and Madhavi Yennapu, and Yamini Priyanka
February 2024, International journal of retina and vitreous,
Copied contents to your clipboard!