Self-reported HIV-positive status but subsequent HIV-negative test result using rapid diagnostic testing algorithms among seven sub-Saharan African military populations

Brief Report: Self-Reported HIV-Positive Status but Subsequent HIV-Negative Test Results in Population-Based HIV Impact Assessment Survey Participants-11 Sub-Saharan African Countries, 2015-2018

BACKGROUND

HIV testing is a critical step to accessing antiretroviral therapy (ART) because early diagnosis can facilitate earlier initiation of ART. This study presents aggregated data of individuals who self-reported being HIV-positive but subsequently tested HIV-negative during nationally representative Population-Based HIV Impact Assessment surveys conducted in 11 countries from 2015 to 2018.

METHOD

Survey participants aged 15 years or older were interviewed by trained personnel using a standard questionnaire to determine HIV testing history and self-reported HIV status. Home-based HIV testing and counseling using rapid diagnostic tests with return of results were performed by survey staff according to the respective national HIV testing services algorithms on venous blood samples. Laboratory-based confirmatory HIV testing for all participants identified as HIV-positives and self-reported positives, irrespective of HIV testing results, was conducted and included Geenius HIV-1/2 and DNA polymerase chain reaction if Geenius was negative or indeterminate.

RESULTS

Of the 16,630 participants who self-reported as HIV-positive, 16,432 (98.6%) were confirmed as HIV-positive and 198 (1.4%) were HIV-negative by subsequent laboratory-based testing. Participants who self-reported as HIV-positive but tested HIV-negative were significantly younger than 30 years, less likely to have received ART, and less likely to have received a CD4 test compared with participants who self-reported as HIV-positive with laboratory-confirmed infection.

CONCLUSIONS

A small proportion of self-reported HIV-positive individuals could not be confirmed as positive, which could be due to initial misdiagnosis, deliberate wrong self-report, or misunderstanding of the questionnaire. As universal ART access is expanding, it is increasingly important to ensure quality of HIV testing and confirmation of HIV diagnosis before ART initiation.

A Comprehensive Approach to Assuring Quality of Laboratory Testing in HIV Surveys: Lessons Learned From the Population-Based HIV Impact Assessment Project

BACKGROUND

Conducting HIV surveys in resource-limited settings is challenging because of logistics, limited availability of trained personnel, and complexity of testing. We described the procedures and systems deemed critical to ensure high-quality laboratory data in the population-based HIV impact assessments and large-scale household surveys.

METHODS

Laboratory professionals were engaged in every stage of the surveys, including protocol development, site assessments, procurement, training, quality assurance, monitoring, analysis, and reporting writing. A tiered network of household, satellite laboratories, and central laboratories, accompanied with trainings, optimized process for blood specimen collection, storage, transport, and real-time monitoring of specimen quality, and test results at each level proved critical in maintaining specimen integrity and high-quality testing. A plausibility review of aggregate merged data was conducted to confirm associations between key variables as a final quality check for quality of laboratory results.

RESULTS

Overall, we conducted a hands-on training for 3355 survey staff across 13 surveys, with 160-387 personnel trained per survey on biomarker processes. Extensive training and monitoring demonstrated that overall, 99% of specimens had adequate volume and 99.8% had no hemolysis, indicating high quality. We implemented quality control and proficiency testing for testing, resolved discrepancies, verified >300 Pima CD4 instruments, and monitored user errors. Aggregate data review for plausibility further confirmed the high quality of testing.

CONCLUSIONS

Ongoing engagement of laboratory personnel to oversee processes at all levels of the surveys is critical for successful national surveys. High-quality population-based HIV impact assessments laboratory data ensured reliable results and demonstrated the impact of HIV programs in 13 countries.