Approaches for improving linkage to HIV care among HIV self-testing individuals in sub-Saharan Africa

Health provider perspectives of Village Health Team-delivered oral HIV self-testing among men in Central Uganda: a qualitative evaluation using RE-AIM framework

Background

HIV self-testing (HIVST) is a practical and effective way to provide HIV testing services to at-risk and underserved populations, particularly men. Utilizing Village Health Teams (VHTs) could enhance community-based delivery of oral HIVST to reach the last un-tested individuals who may be at-risk of infection. However, little is known about what VHTs and facility-based healthcare workers think about facilitating oral HIVST and delivery of subsequent HIV services. We investigated the views of health providers on oral HIVST delivered by VHTs among men in rural communities in Central Uganda.

Methods

We conducted a qualitative study in Mpigi district, interviewing 27 health providers who facilitated oral HIV self-testing among men. The providers consisting of 15 VHTs and 12 facility-based health workers were purposively selected. All interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and translated to English for a hybrid inductive-deductive thematic analysis. We used the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance (RE-AIM) Implementation Science framework to generate and categorize open codes.

Results

In terms of reaching men with HIV testing services, the providers considered HIVST to be a fast and convenient method, which could boost HIV testing. However, they also had concerns about its accuracy. In terms of effectiveness, HIVST was perceived as a reliable, user-friendly, and efficient approach to HIV testing. However, it depended on the user's preference for testing algorithms. Regarding adoption, HIVST was considered to enhance autonomy, well-suited for use in the community, and offered opportunities for linkage and re-linkage into care. However, at times HIVST faced hesitance. As for Implementation, VHTs had various support roles in HIVST but had concerns about social insecurities and delays in seeking subsequent facility-based services after HIVST. Regarding Maintenance, providers recommended several ways to improve oral HIVST including; optimizing tracking of HIVST distribution and use, improving linkage and retention in care after HIVST, diversifying HIVST for combined HIV prevention packages and including more languages, broadening sensitization among potential HIVST users and health providers, differentiating distribution models, and prioritizing targeted HIVST efforts.

Conclusion

HIVST has the potential to increase testing rates and engagement of men in HIV services. However, for it to be implemented on a population-wide scale, continuous sensitization of potential users and health providers is necessary, along with streamlined structures for tracking kit distribution, use, and reporting of results. Further implementation research may be necessary to optimize the role of health providers in facilitating HIVST.

"We usually see a lot of delay in terms of coming for or seeking care": an expert consultation on COVID testing and care pathways in seven low- and middle-income countries

BACKGROUND

Rapid diagnostic testing may support improved treatment of COVID patients. Understanding COVID testing and care pathways is important for assessing the impact and cost-effectiveness of testing in the real world, yet there is limited information on these pathways in low-and-middle income countries (LMICs). We therefore undertook an expert consultation to better understand testing policies and practices, clinical screening, the profile of patients seeking testing or care, linkage to care after testing, treatment, lessons learnt and expected changes in 2023.

METHODS

We organized a qualitative consultation with ten experts from seven LMICs (India, Indonesia, Malawi, Nigeria, Peru, South Africa, and Zimbabwe) identified through purposive sampling. We conducted structured interviews during six regional consultations, and undertook a thematic analysis of responses.

RESULTS

Participants reported that, after initial efforts to scale-up testing, the policy priority given to COVID testing has declined. Comorbidities putting patients at heightened risk (e.g., diabetes) mainly relied on self-identification. The decision to test following clinical screening was highly context-/location-specific, often dictated by local epidemiology and test availability. When rapid diagnostic tests were available, public sector healthcare providers tended to rely on them for diagnosis (alongside PCR for Asian/Latin American participants), while private sector providers predominantly used polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests. Positive test results were generally taken at 'face value' by clinicians, although negative tests with a high index of suspicion may be confirmed with PCR. However, even with a positive result, patients were not always linked to care in a timely manner because of reluctance to receiving care or delays in returning to care centres upon clinical deterioration. Countries often lacked multiple components of the range of therapeutics advised in WHO guidelines: notably so for oral antivirals designed for high-risk mild patients. Severely ill patients mostly received corticosteroids and, in higher-resourced settings, tocilizumab.

CONCLUSIONS

Testing does not always prompt enhanced care, due to reluctance on the part of patients and limited therapeutic availability within clinical settings. Any analysis of the impact or cost-effectiveness of testing policies post pandemic needs to either consider investment in optimal treatment pathways or constrain estimates of benefits based on actual practice.

"We usually see a lot of delay in terms of coming for or seeking care": an expert consultation on COVID testing and care pathways in low- and middle-income countries

Background

Rapid diagnostic testing may support improved treatment of COVID patients. Understanding COVID testing and care pathways is important for assessing the impact and cost-effectiveness of testing in the real world, yet there is limited information on these pathways in low-and-middle income countries (LMICs). We therefore undertook an expert consultation to better understand testing policies and practices, clinical screening, the profile of patients seeking testing or care, linkage to care after testing, treatment, lessons learnt and expected changes in 2023 in LMICs.

Methods

We organized a qualitative consultation with ten experts from seven LMICs identified through purposive sampling. We conducted structured interviews during six regional consultations, and undertook a thematic analysis of the responses to our questions.

Results

Participants reported that, after initial efforts to scale-up testing (which often encountered delays), the policy priority given to COVID testing has declined. Comorbidities putting patients at heightened risk (e.g., diabetes) mainly relied on self-identification. The decision to test following clinical screening was highly context- and location-specific, often dictated by local epidemiology and test availability. When rapid diagnostic tests were available, public sector healthcare providers tended to rely on them for diagnosis, while private sector providers predominantly used polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests. Positive test results were generally taken at 'face value' by clinicians, although negative tests with a high index of suspicion may be confirmed with PCR. However, even with a positive result, patients were not always linked to care in a timely manner because of reluctance to receiving care or delays in returning to care centres upon clinical deterioration. Countries often lacked multiple components of the range of therapeutics advised in WHO guidelines: notably so for oral antivirals designed for high-risk mild patients. Severely ill patients mostly received corticosteroids and, in higher-resourced settings, tocilizumab.

Conclusions

Testing does not always prompt enhanced care, due to reluctance on the part of patients and limited therapeutic availability within clinical settings. Any analysis of the impact or cost-effectiveness of testing policies post pandemic needs to either consider investment in optimal treatment pathways or constrain estimates of benefits based on actual practice.