In a cervical cancer screening programme comparing VIA with HPV DNA testing as the primary screening tool, which statement about the two-visit versus single-visit approach is epidemiologically correct?
- A VIA allows 'screen-and-treat' in a single visit, reducing loss to follow-up compared to HPV DNA testing requiring laboratory infrastructure ✓
- B HPV DNA testing has lower sensitivity than VIA for detecting CIN 2+
- C VIA has higher specificity than HPV DNA testing in all age groups
- D HPV DNA testing requires colposcopy confirmation before any treatment
Correct answer: A. VIA allows 'screen-and-treat' in a single visit, reducing loss to follow-up compared to HPV DNA testing requiring laboratory infrastructure
Explanation
VIA (Visual Inspection with Acetic Acid) enables same-day 'see-and-treat' (cryotherapy or LEEP) in a single visit, which is critical in low-resource settings where loss to follow-up between two visits is high. HPV DNA testing has higher sensitivity (>90% for CIN2+) than VIA (~70%), but requires laboratory capacity and results in a 2-visit strategy (screen then treat), with consequent dropout. WHO recommends HPV DNA as preferred primary screen but VIA remains practical where lab infrastructure is lacking.
Reference: Park's Textbook of Preventive and Social Medicine, 27th ed.
High-yield for: NEET PGINI-CETNExTFMGEUSMLEPLABMRCP
Written and medically reviewed by the StethoPrep medical team.