Experiences and preferences towards collecting a urine and cervicovaginal self-sample among women attending a colposcopy clinic

Mirte Schaafsma, Rianne van den Helder, Maaike C. G. Bleeker, Fleur Rosier-van Dunné, Irene A. M. van der Avoort, Renske D. M. Steenbergen, Nienke E. van Trommel

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

7 Citations (Scopus)


The effectiveness of cervical cancer screening is hampered by low attendance rates. The collection of a urine sample is hypothesized to engage non-attenders in cervical cancer screening. The aim of this prospective cohort study was to evaluate experiences of women on urine collection and cervicovaginal self-sampling in a home-based setting and preferences for future cervical cancer screening. This study included 140 women, with a median age of 40 years, who were planned for a large loop excision of the transformation zone (LLETZ) procedure. All women collected a urine sample using conventional urine cups and a cervicovaginal self-sample prior to the LLETZ in a home-based setting. Following sample collection, women filled in a questionnaire. Results showed that the instructions of urine collection and cervicovaginal self-sampling were considered clear (95%, 95%CI: 88–98; 92%, 95%CI: 83–96, respectively). Women considered urine collection compared to cervicovaginal self-sampling to be more acceptable (p < 0.001), and to provide more reliable results (p < 0.001). The three highest reported preferred sampling methods for future cervical cancer screening were: urine collection (n = 39, 28%, 95%CI: 19–39), clinician-taken cervical scrape (n = 32, 23%, 95%CI: 15–34), and equal preference for urine collection, clinician-taken cervical scrape and cervicovaginal self-sampling (n = 30, 21%, 95%CI: 14–32). In conclusion, urine collection and cervicovaginal self-sampling are acceptable sampling methods, considered easy to collect in a home-based setting, and moreover, considered trustworthy. Although these results are promising, more research is required to determine if urine collection also lowers the barrier for non-attendees and, thereby, increases the attendance rates of cervical cancer screening.

Original languageEnglish
Article number101749
JournalPreventive medicine reports
Publication statusPublished - 1 Apr 2022


  • Cervical cancer
  • Experience
  • Preference
  • Self-sampling
  • Urine collection

Cite this