Dataset Information

Does community-based distribution of HIV self-tests increase uptake of HIV testing? Results of pair-matched cluster randomised trial in Zambia.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

Ending HIV by 2030 is a global priority. Achieving this requires alternative HIV testing strategies, such as HIV self-testing (HIVST) to reach all individuals with HIV testing services (HTS). We present the results of a trial evaluating the impact of community-based distribution of HIVST in community and facility settings on the uptake of HTS in rural and urban Zambia.

Design

Pair-matched cluster randomised trial.

Methods

In catchment areas of government health facilities, OraQuick HIVST kits were distributed by community-based distributors (CBDs) over 12 months in 2016-2017. Within matched pairs, clusters were randomised to receive the HIVST intervention or standard of care (SOC). Individuals aged ≥16 years were eligible for HIVST. Within communities, CBDs offered HIVST in high traffic areas, door to door and at healthcare facilities. The primary outcome was self-reported recent testing within the previous 12 months measured using a population-based survey.

Results

In six intervention clusters (population 148 541), 60 CBDs distributed 65 585 HIVST kits. A recent test was reported by 66% (1622/2465) in the intervention arm compared with 60% (1456/2429) in SOC arm (adjusted risk ratio 1.08, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.24; p=0.15). Uptake of the HIVST intervention was low: 24% of respondents in the intervention arm (585/2493) used an HIVST kit in the previous 12 months. No social harms were identified during implementation.

Conclusion

Despite distributing a large number of HIVST kits, we found no evidence that this community-based HIVST distribution intervention increased HTS uptake. Other models of HIVST distribution, including secondary distribution and community-designed distribution models, provide alternative strategies to reach target populations.

Trial registration number

ClinicalTrials.gov Registry (NCT02793804).

SUBMITTER: Neuman M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8287620 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Knowledge of HIV status remains below target in sub-Saharan Africa, especially among men and adolescents. HIV self-testing (HIVST) is a novel approach that enables unique distribution strategies, with potential to be highly decentralised and to provide complementary coverage to facility-based testing approaches. However, substantial gaps in evidence remain on the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of HIVST, particularly in rural settings, and on approaches to facilitate linkage to confirmatory HIV testing, prevention, and treatment services. This protocol describes two cluster-randomized trials (CRT) included within the UNITAID/PSI HIV Self-Testing Africa (STAR) project. METHODS:Two independent CRTs were designed around existing reproductive health programmes in rural Malawi and rural/peri-urban Zambia. Common features include use of constrained randomisation to allocate health clinic catchment areas to either standard HIV testing (SOC) or SOC plus community-based distribution of OraQuick HIV Self Tests (Bethlehem, PA USA, assembled in Thailand) by trained lay distributors selected by the community. Community-based distribution agents will be trained (3-day curriculum) to provide brief demonstration of kit use and interpretation, information and encouragement to access follow up services, and management of social harm. The primary outcome of both CRTs is the proportion of the population aged 16 years and older who tested for HIV within the 12-month intervention period. Secondary outcomes in both trials include lifetime HIV testing, antiretroviral therapy (ART) initiation and ART use. Circumcision status among males will be a secondary outcome in Zambia and clinic-level demand for ART will be a secondary outcome in Malawi. Outcomes will be measured using cross-sectional household surveys, and routine data extraction from participating clinics. Costing studies will be used to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the intervention arm. Qualitative research will be used to guide distribution and explore reasons for testing and linkage to onward care. DISCUSSION:The STAR-Malawi and STAR-Zambia trials will provide rigorous evidence of whether community-based lay HIVST distribution is an effective and cost-effective approach to increasing coverage of HIV testing and demand for follow-on HIV services in rural and peri-urban communities in sub-Saharan Africa. TRIAL REGISTRATION:Clinicaltrials.gov, Malawi: NCT02718274 , 18 March 2016; Zambia: NCT02793804 , 3 June 2016. Protocol date: 21 February 2018.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Current models of HIV service delivery, with frequent facility visits, have led to facility congestion, patient and healthcare provider dissatisfaction, and suboptimal quality of services and retention in care. The Zambian urban adherence club (AC) is a health service innovation designed to improve on-time drug pickup and retention in HIV care through off-hours facility access and pharmacist-led group drug distribution. Similar models of differentiated service delivery (DSD) have shown promise in South Africa, but observational analyses of these models are prone to bias and confounding. We sought to evaluate the effectiveness and implementation of ACs in Zambia using a more rigorous study design. METHODS AND FINDINGS:Using a matched-pair cluster randomized study design (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02776254), 10 clinics were randomized to intervention (5 clinics) or control (5 clinics). At each clinic, between May 19 and October 27, 2016, a systematic random sample was assessed for eligibility (HIV+, age ? 14 years, on ART >6 months, not acutely ill, CD4 count not <200 cells/mm3) and willingness to participate in an AC. Clinical and antiretroviral drug pickup data were obtained through the existing electronic medical record. AC meeting attendance data were collected at intervention facilities prospectively through October 28, 2017. The primary outcome was time to first late drug pickup (>7 days late). Intervention effect was estimated using unadjusted Kaplan-Meier survival curves and a Cox proportional hazards model to derive an adjusted hazard ratio (aHR). Medication possession ratio (MPR) and implementation outcomes (adoption, acceptability, appropriateness, feasibility, and fidelity) were additionally evaluated as secondary outcomes. Baseline characteristics were similar between 571 intervention and 489 control participants with respect to median age (42 versus 41 years), sex (62% versus 66% female), median time since ART initiation (4.8 versus 5.0 years), median CD4 count at study enrollment (506 versus 533 cells/mm3), and baseline retention (53% versus 55% with at least 1 late drug pickup in previous 12 months). The rate of late drug pickup was lower in intervention participants compared to control participants (aHR 0.26, 95% CI 0.15-0.45, p < 0.001). Median MPR was 100% in intervention participants compared to 96% in control participants (p < 0.001). Although 18% (683/3,734) of AC group meeting visits were missed, on-time drug pickup (within 7 days) still occurred in 51% (350/683) of these missed visits through alternate means (use of buddy pickup or early return to the facility). Qualitative evaluation suggests that the intervention was acceptable to both patients and providers. While patients embraced the convenience and patient-centeredness of the model, preference for traditional adherence counseling and need for greater human resources influenced intervention appropriateness and feasibility from the provider perspective. The main limitations of this study were the small number of clusters, lack of viral load data, and relatively short follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS:ACs were found to be an effective model of service delivery for reducing late ART drug pickup among HIV-infected adults in Zambia. Drug pickup outside of group meetings was relatively common and underscores the need for DSD models to be flexible and patient-centered if they are to be effective. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02776254.

Project description:BACKGROUND:HIV self-testing (HIVST) may play a role in addressing gaps in HIV testing coverage and as an entry point for HIV prevention services. We conducted a cluster randomized trial of 2 HIVST distribution mechanisms compared to the standard of care among female sex workers (FSWs) in Zambia. METHODS AND FINDINGS:Trained peer educators in Kapiri Mposhi, Chirundu, and Livingstone, Zambia, each recruited 6 FSW participants. Peer educator-FSW groups were randomized to 1 of 3 arms: (1) delivery (direct distribution of an oral HIVST from the peer educator), (2) coupon (a coupon for collection of an oral HIVST from a health clinic/pharmacy), or (3) standard-of-care HIV testing. Participants in the 2 HIVST arms received 2 kits: 1 at baseline and 1 at 10 weeks. The primary outcome was any self-reported HIV testing in the past month at the 1- and 4-month visits, as HIVST can replace other types of HIV testing. Secondary outcomes included linkage to care, HIVST use in the HIVST arms, and adverse events. Participants completed questionnaires at 1 and 4 months following peer educator interventions. In all, 965 participants were enrolled between September 16 and October 12, 2016 (delivery, N = 316; coupon, N = 329; standard of care, N = 320); 20% had never tested for HIV. Overall HIV testing at 1 month was 94.9% in the delivery arm, 84.4% in the coupon arm, and 88.5% in the standard-of-care arm (delivery versus standard of care risk ratio [RR] = 1.07, 95% CI 0.99-1.15, P = 0.10; coupon versus standard of care RR = 0.95, 95% CI 0.86-1.05, P = 0.29; delivery versus coupon RR = 1.13, 95% CI 1.04-1.22, P = 0.005). Four-month rates were 84.1% for the delivery arm, 79.8% for the coupon arm, and 75.1% for the standard-of-care arm (delivery versus standard of care RR = 1.11, 95% CI 0.98-1.27, P = 0.11; coupon versus standard of care RR = 1.06, 95% CI 0.92-1.22, P = 0.42; delivery versus coupon RR = 1.05, 95% CI 0.94-1.18, P = 0.40). At 1 month, the majority of HIV tests were self-tests (88.4%). HIV self-test use was higher in the delivery arm compared to the coupon arm (RR = 1.14, 95% CI 1.05-1.23, P = 0.001) at 1 month, but there was no difference at 4 months. Among participants reporting a positive HIV test at 1 (N = 144) and 4 months (N = 235), linkage to care was non-significantly lower in the 2 HIVST arms compared to the standard-of-care arm. There were 4 instances of intimate partner violence related to study participation, 3 of which were related to HIV self-test use. Limitations include the self-reported nature of study outcomes and overall high uptake of HIV testing. CONCLUSIONS:In this study among FSWs in Zambia, we found that HIVST was acceptable and accessible. However, HIVST may not substantially increase HIV cascade progression in contexts where overall testing and linkage are already high. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02827240.

Project description:BackgroundThe HPTN 071 (PopART) cluster-randomised trial provided door-to-door HIV testing services to a large proportion of individuals residing in 21 intervention communities in Zambia and South Africa from 2014 to 2017 and reached the UNAIDS first 90 target among women in Zambia, yet gaps remained among men and young adults. This cluster-randomised study nested in the HPTN 071 (PopART) trial sought to increase knowledge of HIV status across all groups by offering the choice of oral HIV self-testing in addition to routine door-to-door HIV testing services.MethodsWe nested this cluster-randomised trial in four HTPN 071 (PopART) intervention communities in northern Zambia. 66 zones (clusters) in these communities were randomly allocated (1:1) to either oral HIV self-testing plus routine door-to-door HIV testing services (HIV self-testing group) or the PopART standard of care of door-to-door HIV testing services alone (non- HIV self-testing group) over a 3-month period. All individuals aged 16 years or older were eligible for HIV testing. Randomisation was achieved by randomly selecting one allocation from a list of 10 000 possible allocations during a public ceremony. In HIV self-testing zones, trained lay-counsellors (known as community HIV care providers) visited households and offered eligible individuals the choice of HIV testing using HIV self-testing or routine door-to-door HIV testing services. For individuals aged 18 years or older whose partner was absent during the household visit, an HIV self-test kit could be left for secondary distribution to the absent partner. The primary outcome was knowledge of HIV status (defined as self-reporting HIV positive to the community HIV care providers or accepting an offer of HIV testing services). Outcomes were measured among households that were first visited, and individuals first enumerated as a household member during the HIV self-testing intervention period. We analysed data at the individual level using population-average logistic regression models, accounting for clustering of outcomes by zone, to estimate the effect of the intervention. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02994329.FindingsBetween Feb 1, and April 30, 2017, the community HIV care providers enumerated 13 267 eligible individuals in the HIV self-testing group and 13 706 in the non-HIV self-testing group. After intervention implementation, 9027 (68%) of 13 267 in the HIV self-testing group had knowledge of HIV status compared with 8952 (65%) of 13 706 in the non-HIV self-testing group (adjusted odds ratio 1·30, 95% CI 1·03-1·65; p=0·03). The effect differed by sex (pinteraction=0·01). Among men, knowledge of HIV status was higher in the HIV self-testing group than in the non-HIV self-testing group (3843 [60%] of 6368 vs 3571 [55%] of 6486; adjusted odds ratio 1·31, 95% CI 1·07-1·60; p=0·01). There was no evidence of a between-group difference among female participants.InterpretationProviding a choice of HIV self-testing during delivery of door-to-door HIV testing services increased knowledge of HIV status, driven by an effect among men. Lay counsellors have a vital role to play in adapting HIV self-testing interventions to local context.FundingThe International Initiative for Impact Evaluation (3ie), the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institute on Drug Abuse, National Institute of Mental Health, and the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief.

Project description:BackgroundAchieving higher rates of partner HIV testing and couples testing among pregnant and postpartum women in sub-Saharan Africa is essential for the success of combination HIV prevention, including the prevention of mother-to-child transmission. We aimed to determine whether providing multiple HIV self-tests to pregnant and postpartum women for secondary distribution is more effective at promoting partner testing and couples testing than conventional strategies based on invitations to clinic-based testing.Methods and findingsWe conducted a randomized trial in Kisumu, Kenya, between June 11, 2015, and January 15, 2016. Six hundred antenatal and postpartum women aged 18-39 y were randomized to an HIV self-testing (HIVST) group or a comparison group. Participants in the HIVST group were given two oral-fluid-based HIV test kits, instructed on how to use them, and encouraged to distribute a test kit to their male partner or use both kits for testing as a couple. Participants in the comparison group were given an invitation card for clinic-based HIV testing and encouraged to distribute the card to their male partner, a routine practice in many health clinics. The primary outcome was partner testing within 3 mo of enrollment. Among 570 participants analyzed, partner HIV testing was more likely in the HIVST group (90.8%, 258/284) than the comparison group (51.7%, 148/286; difference = 39.1%, 95% CI 32.4% to 45.8%, p < 0.001). Couples testing was also more likely in the HIVST group than the comparison group (75.4% versus 33.2%, difference = 42.1%, 95% CI 34.7% to 49.6%, p < 0.001). No participants reported intimate partner violence due to HIV testing. This study was limited by self-reported outcomes, a common limitation in many studies involving HIVST due to the private manner in which self-tests are meant to be used.ConclusionsProvision of multiple HIV self-tests to women seeking antenatal and postpartum care was successful in promoting partner testing and couples testing. This approach warrants further consideration as countries develop HIVST policies and seek new ways to increase awareness of HIV status among men and promote couples testing.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT02386215.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Few studies have explored how economic incentives influence behavioral outcomes. This study aimed to identify pathways of action of an incentives-based intervention to increase men's participation in HIV testing. METHODS:The qualitative study was embedded in a randomized-controlled trial that compared effectiveness of gain-framed, loss-framed and lottery-based incentives to increase HIV testing among men. Following testing at a community health campaign, 60 in-depth interviews were conducted with men systematically sampled on the basis of age, incentive group, and campaign attendance. Data were coded deductively and inductively for thematic content analysis. RESULTS:Incentives addressed men's structural, interpersonal and individual-level barriers to testing: offered at convenient locations, incentives offset costs of testing, in lost wages, which are exacerbated when livelihoods required mobility. Interpersonal barriers included anticipated stigma/fear of disclosure, social obligations, and negative peer influences. Providing incentives in public settings provided "social proof" that prizes could be won, and facilitated social support and positive norms by promoting testing with trusted others. Incentives had little influence when men appraised prize values to be low, disbelieved they would win a prize, or were already intrinsically motivated to test. Yet, incentives provided a behavioral 'cue to action' for many men who perceived themselves to be susceptible to HIV and perceived HIV disease to be severe, acting as secondary motivator for testing that "sweetened the deal". CONCLUSION:Incentives can be an important 'lever' to promote men's healthy behaviors in resource-poor settings. HIV testing in convenient, public settings, when paired with incentives, provides multiple pathways to stimulate men's testing uptake. TRIAL REGISTRATION:Registered with ClinicalTrials.gov on 08/10/2016, ID: NCT02890459. The first participant was enrolled on 11th April 2016.