| Literature DB >> 19014468 |
Yodi Mahendradhata1, Riris Andono Ahmad, Pierre Lefèvre, Marleen Boelaert, Patrick Van der Stuyft.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: HIV and HIV-TB co-infection are slowly increasing in Indonesia. WHO recommends HIV testing among TB patients as a key response to the dual HIV-TB epidemic. Concerns over potential negative impacts to TB control and lack of operational clarity have hindered progress. We investigated the barriers and opportunities for introducing HIV testing perceived by TB patients and providers in Jogjakarta, Indonesia.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2008 PMID: 19014468 PMCID: PMC2596127 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2458-8-385
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Public Health ISSN: 1471-2458 Impact factor: 3.295
Figure 1Patient flow.
Characteristics of enrolled TB patients
| Patients' Characteristics | Patients' category* | Total N (%) | |||
| Group 1 N (%) | Group 2 N (%) | Group 3 N (%) | Group 4 N (%) | ||
| Gender | |||||
| Male | 4 (66.7) | 8 (50.0) | 1 (50.0) | 5 (55.6) | 18 (54.5) |
| Female | 2 (33.3) | 8 (50.0) | 1 (50.0) | 4 (44.4) | 15 (45.5) |
| Age group | |||||
| 15–19 years old | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 1 (50.0) | 1 (11.1) | 2 (6.1) |
| 20–29 years old | 2 (33.3) | 9 (56.3) | 1 (50.0) | 4 (44.4) | 16 (48.5) |
| 30–39 years old | 0 (0.0) | 8 (31.3) | 0 (0.0) | 1 (11.1) | 6 (18.2) |
| 40–49 years old | 0 (0.0) | 2 (12.5) | 0 (0.0) | 3 (33.3) | 5 (15.2) |
| > 49 years old | 4 (66.7) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 4 (12.1) |
| Education | |||||
| Primary | 1 (16.7) | 2 (12.5) | 0 (0.0) | 2 (22.2) | 5 (15.2) |
| Secondary | 3 (50.0) | 11 (68.8) | 0 (0.0) | 4 (44.4) | 18 (54.5) |
| Tertiary | 2 (33.3) | 3 (18.8) | 2 (100.0) | 3 (33.3) | 10 (30.3) |
| Married | |||||
| Yes | 4 (66.7) | 11 (68.8) | 1 (50.0) | 5 (55.6) | 21 (63.6) |
| No | 2 (33.3) | 5 (31.3) | 1 (50.0) | 4 (44.4) | 12 (36.4) |
| Health facility type | |||||
| Public | 3 (50.0) | 11 (68.8) | 2 (100.0) | 8 (88.9) | 24 (72.7) |
| Private | 3 (50.0) | 5 (31.3) | 0 (0.0) | 1 (11.1) | 9 (27.3) |
| TOTAL | 6 (100.0) | 16 (100.0) | 2 (100.0) | 9 (100.0) | 33 (100.0 |
*Patients category:
• Group 1. Not accepting unlinked anonymous and not interested for VCT.
• Group 2. Accepted unlinked anonymous but not interested for VCT.
• Group 3. Accepted unlinked anonymous, expressed interest but did not attended VCT.
• Group 4. Accepted unlinked anonymous and attended VCT.
Patients' perceptions and interest for VCT
| Patient's perception | Interested for VCT | |
| At risk of being infected | Yes | majority |
| No | minority | |
| VCT entails benefits | Yes | roughly half |
| No | small minority | |
| HIV patients are stigmatized | Yes | roughly half |
| No | minority | |
| Fear of knowing test result | Yes | small minority |
| No | vast majority | |
| Access to VCT is a burden | Yes | minority |
| No | vast minority |
Nurses' perceptions of barriers to introduce HIV testing among TB patients*
| Perception | Health centres | Hospitals and chest clinics | ||
| Rural | Urban | Public | Private | |
| 'Hard' patients | - | - | + | ++ |
| Additional burden | +/- | +/- | ++ | ++ |
| Patients offended | - | - | ++ | ++ |
| Stigmatization | + | +/- | +++ | ++ |
| Lack of facility | + | +++ | +/- | + |
| Communication difficulty | +/- | +/- | ++ | +++ |
* "+++" = critical; "++" = very important; "+" = "important"; "+/-" = less important; "-" = negligible