Teal Health is proud to share peer-reviewed findings published in Women's Health Reports. The study compares the screening experience reported by patients using the Teal Wand™ at home with their experience of a standard in-clinic speculum exam — and the difference is striking. Across nearly every measure, and across the populations most at risk of being underscreened, at-home self-collection delivered a meaningfully better experience and a clear preference for staying engaged in cervical cancer screening.
The problem we set out to address
Cervical cancer is one of the most preventable cancers in existence — but more than 20 million people with a cervix in the U.S. are currently behind on routine screening, and the screening gap has been widening since 2000 across nearly every demographic. The reasons are well-documented: pain, discomfort, embarrassment, lack of time, financial pressure, lack of clinic access, and prior negative experiences (including sexual trauma and provider mistrust) all push people away from the speculum-based exam. Those barriers fall hardest on populations already facing inequities in care. This study set out to ask a specific question: when those same people use a thoughtfully designed at-home option, does the experience actually change?
What we studied
This multi-center pilot study, conducted across seven U.S. clinical sites, enrolled 185 participants representative of the U.S. screening-aged population in race, age, income, and education. Each participant first used the Teal Wand to self-collect a vaginal sample in a simulated at-home setting using only the device's written instructions, then received a clinician-collected sample with a standard speculum and cervical brush. Both samples were tested for high-risk HPV using the FDA-approved Roche cobas® assay. Participants then completed surveys on usability, prior screening experiences, preferences, and the experience of both collection methods. The research team analyzed differences across subgroups most affected by screening disparities: sexual orientation, menopause status, prior HPV diagnosis, and income. The study was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05669911).
What we found
The contrast between the two collection methods was sharp, statistically significant, and consistent across nearly every subgroup analyzed:
- Pain was reported nearly 10 times more often with the in-clinic exam — 21% with clinician-collection versus just 2% with the Teal Wand (p < 0.001).
- Feeling "in control" was reported more than 6 times more often during self-collection — 37% versus 6% (p < 0.001).
- Discomfort was reported by 53% of participants during the speculum exam, compared with 20% with self-collection (p < 0.001). Embarrassment and nervousness followed the same pattern.
- Among LGBQ+ participants, 41% reported pain and 68% reported discomfort during the clinician exam, compared with just 5% and 27% with the Teal Wand. None reported feeling "at-ease" or "in-control" during the speculum exam; meaningful percentages did during self-collection.
- Among perimenopausal participants, no one reported pain during self-collection, compared with 24% during the speculum exam. Among postmenopausal participants, the contrast was 8% versus 46%.
- Among participants with a prior HPV diagnosis — a higher-risk group requiring more frequent screening — every negative experience (pain, discomfort, embarrassment, nervousness) was reported significantly more often during clinician-collection.
- Across lower- and middle-income groups, negative experiences were reported significantly more during the in-clinic exam, and 82–93% said they would be more likely to stay current on screening if at-home collection were an option.
- 96% of all participants successfully self-collected using only the written instructions, with most finishing in under 5 minutes, and 94% said they would feel confident using the device knowing the results would be equivalent to clinician-collection.
- 87% of all participants overall said they would be more likely to engage in routine screening if an at-home option were available.
Why it matters
Routine screening can prevent up to 93% of cervical cancers in the U.S., and modeling shows that improving screening engagement is the single most cost-effective path to eliminating cervical cancer as a public health concern. But screening only works if people actually do it — and the standard speculum-based exam is a barrier for too many of the people who need screening most. This study provides direct, peer-reviewed evidence that when screening is designed around the patient's experience — with privacy, comfort, and control built in — the people who have historically been pushed away from care show up for it. That has the potential to translate directly into avoided cancers, fewer deaths, and life-years gained.
Teal Health's role
Teal Health designed the Teal Wand™ specifically for at-home use, with a single-handed applicator, an expanding sponge tip optimized for sample collection across all bodies, and a form factor familiar to anyone who has used a tampon. This study is part of a growing body of peer-reviewed Teal-led research, alongside our pivotal SELF-CERV results published in JAMA Network Open, our sub-analysis on screening among women with higher BMI in Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics, and our deeper analysis of the LGBQ+ screening experience in Cancer Control. Together, these studies establish the Teal Wand as both clinically equivalent to clinician-collected screening and uniquely suited to closing screening gaps for the populations who need a better option most.
We built Teal because cervical cancer prevention should never depend on whether the standard tools were designed with you in mind. This study is one more piece of evidence that, with the right tools, screening can finally meet people where they are.