The Impact on HIV Testing Over 6 Months When Free Oral HIV Self-Test Kits Were Available to Truck Drivers in Kenya: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Using the Health Belief Model to Understand Why Making Oral HIV Self-Testing Available to Truck Drivers in Kenya Had Little Impact on Six-Month Testing

Research has found that offering HIV self-testing (HIVST) to truckers in Kenya increased testing rates at baseline but not over 6-month follow-up. We explored possible explanations based on the Health Belief Model by assessing HIV risk perception, self-efficacy, and fatalism as possible effect modifiers of the impact of offering HIVST (intervention n = 150) versus standard of care (SOC n = 155) on 6-month testing on the multiplicative and additive scales using log binomial and linear binomial regression and stratifying on significant modifiers. We found significant interaction between the intervention and fatalism on both the multiplicative (p = 0.020) and additive (p = 0.020) scales. In the stratified models, the HIVST intervention was associated with higher HIV testing among participants with low fatalism but lower testing among those with high fatalism (risk ratio [RR] = 1.30, p = 0.065 versus RR = 0.74, p = 0.072; risk difference [RD] per 100 = 14.00, p = 0.080 versus RD=-14.69, p = 0.086). Truckers in Kenya are described as being highly fatalistic, feeling lack of control over their lives and health. We found that fatalistic views negated the potential benefit of offering HIVST to truckers. For HIVST to have an impact among truckers, psychosocial interventions may be needed that address fatalistic views.

Assessing awareness and use of HIV self-testing kits after the introduction of a community-based HIV self-testing programme among men who have sex with men in Kenya

Men who have sex with men (MSM) bear a disproportionate burden of new HIV infections in Kenya, while experiencing discrimination, leading to suboptimal levels of HIV care. HIV self-testing (HIVST) is a tool to increase HIV screening and earlier diagnosis; however, questions remain regarding how best to scale-up HIVST to MSM in Kenya. The main objective of this study was to examine changes in knowledge and use of HIVST after implementation of a community-led HIVST project. Participants were MSM recruited from Kisumu, Mombasa, and Kiambu counties. Data were collected from two rounds (Round 1: 2019; Round 2: 2020) of serial cross-sectional integrated biological and behavioural assessments (IBBA), pre-, and post-project implementation. Two main outcomes were measured: 1) whether the respondent had ever heard of HIVST; and 2) whether they had ever used HIVST kits. Changes in outcomes between IBBA rounds were examined using modified multivariable Poisson regression models; adjusted prevalence ratios (aPR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) are reported. A total of 2,328 respondents were included in main analyses. The proportion of respondents who had heard of HIVST increased from 75% in Round 1 to 94% in Round 2 (aPR: 1.2, 95% CI: 1.2-1.3), while those reporting using an HIVST kit increased from 20% to 53% (aPR: 2.3, 95% CI: 2.0-2.6). Higher levels of education and HIV programme awareness were associated with both outcomes. Awareness and use of HIVST kits increased after implementation of a community-led HIVST implementation project, demonstrating the importance of integration with existing community groups.

Evaluating effect modification by HIV testing history to understand the mechanisms behind the impact of announcing HIV self-testing availability in a clinic system in Kenya

Background

In sub-Saharan Africa, truckers and female sex workers (FSWs) have high HIV risk and face challenges accessing HIV testing. Adding HIV self-testing (HIVST) to standard of care (SOC) programs increases testing rates. However, the underlying mechanisms are not fully understood. HIVST may decrease barriers (inconvenient clinic hours, confidentiality concerns) and thus we would expect a greater impact among those not accessing SOC testing (barriers prevented previous testing). As a new biomedical technology, HIVST may also be a cue to action (the novelty of a new product motivates people to try it), in which case we might expect the impact to be similar by testing history.

Methods

We used data from two randomized controlled trials evaluating the announcement of HIVST availability via text-message to male truckers (n = 2,260) and FSWs (n = 2,196) in Kenya. Log binomial regression was used to estimate the risk ratio (RR) for testing ≤ 2 months post-announcement in the intervention vs. SOC overall and by having tested in the previous 12-months (12m-tested); and we assessed interaction between the intervention and 12m-tested. We also estimated risk differences (RD) per 100 and tested additive interaction using linear binomial regression.

Results

We found no evidence that 12m-tested modified the HIVST impact. Among truckers, those in the intervention were 3.1 times more likely to test than the SOC (p < 0.001). Although testing was slightly higher among those not 12m-tested (RR = 3.5, p = 0.001 vs. RR = 2.7, p = 0.020), the interaction was not significant (p = 0.683). Among FSWs, results were similar (unstratified RR = 2.6, p < 0.001; 12m-tested: RR = 2.7, p < 0.001; not 12m-tested: RR = 2.5, p < 0.001; interaction p = 0.795). We also did not find significant interaction on the additive scale (truckers: unstratified RD = 2.8, p < 0.001; 12m-tested RD = 3.8, p = 0.037; not 12m-tested RD = 2.5, p = 0.003; interaction p = 0.496. FSWs: unstratified RD = 9.7, p < 0.001; 12m-tested RD = 10.7, p < 0.001, not 12m-tested RD = 9.1, p < 0.001; interaction p = 0.615).

Conclusion

The impact of HIVST was not significantly modified by 12m-tested among truckers and FSWs on the multiplicative or additive scales. Announcing the availability of HIVST likely served primarily as a cue to action and testing clinics might maximize the HIVST benefits by holding periodic HIVST events to maintain the cue to action impact rather than making HIVST continually available.

Preferences, beliefs, and attitudes about oral fluid and blood-based HIV self-testing among truck drivers in Kenya choosing not to test for HIV

Introduction

Clinical trials in sub-Saharan Africa support that HIV self-testing (HIVST) can increase testing rates in difficult-to-reach populations. However, trials mostly evaluate oral fluid HIVST only. We describe preferences for oral fluid vs. blood-based HIVST to elucidate prior trial results and inform testing programs.

Methods

Participants were recruited from a HIVST randomized controlled trial in Nakuru County, Kenya, which aimed to test the effect of choice between oral HIVST and facility-based testing compared to standard-of-care on HIV testing among truck drivers. We conducted in-depth interviews (IDIs) with purposively sampled trial participants who declined HIV testing at baseline or who were offered access to oral fluid HIVST and chose not to pick up the kit during follow-up. IDIs were conducted with all consenting participants. We first describe IDI participants compared to the other study participants, assessing the statistical significance of differences in characteristics between the two samples and then describe preferences, beliefs, and attitudes about HIVST biospecimen type expressed in the IDIs.

Results

The final sample consisted of 16 men who refused HIV testing at baseline and 8 men who did not test during follow-up. All IDI participants had tested prior to study participation; mean number of years since last HIV test was 1.55, vs. 0.98 among non-IDI participants (p = 0.093). Of the 14 participants who answered the question about preferred type of HIVST, nine preferred blood-based HIVST, and five, oral HIVST. Preference varied by study arm with four of five participants who answered this question in the Choice arm and five of nine in the SOC arm preferring blood-based HIVST. Six key themes characterized truckers' views about test type: (1) Rapidity of return of test results. (2) Pain and fear associated with finger prick. (3) Ease of use. (4) Trust in test results; (5) fear of infection by contamination; and (6) Concerns about HIVST kit storage and disposal.

Conclusion

We found no general pattern in the themes for preference for oral or blood-based HIVST, but if blood-based HIVST had been offered, some participants in the Choice arm might have chosen to self-test. Offering choices for HIVST could increase testing uptake.