Helena Obermair|Rachael H Dodd|Carissa Bonner|Jesse Jansen|Kirsten McCaffery
‘It has saved thousands of lives, so why change it?’ Content analysis of objections to cervical screening programme changes in Australia
University of Sydney|University of Sydney|University of Sydney|University of Sydney|University of Sydney
objectives incidence mortality cervical cancer halved since introduction australian cervical screening programme 1991 involving 2yearly pap smears ages 1869 years 2017 programme changed 5 yearly primary human papillomavirus hpv testing women aged 2574 years study investigated reasons opposition renewed screening programme within openended comments online petition stop may 1st changes pap smearssave womens lives opposing changes received 70 000 signatures almost 20 000 comments methods content analysis random sample 2000 comments reflecting 10 19 633 comments posted februarymarch 2017 results nineteen codes identified reflecting four themes 1 valuing womens health rights 2 political statements 3 concerns healthcare funding cuts 4 opposition specific components new screening programme prevalent codes placing value womens health 33 concerns increasing screening intervals 17 opposition changes related personal experiences cervical cancer cervical abnormalities 15 concern key change technology hpv testing instead pap smears expressed less 3 comments opposition changes health professionals noted conclusions screening changes within selected group perceived threatening womens health political policy created male decisionmakers costcutting exercise many commenters concerned increased screening intervals later screening onset little opposition expressed regarding testing technology analysis may inform public education communication strategies future changes cervical screening programmes internationally preemptively address specific concerns changes