| Literature DB >> 22353553 |
Jayne Lewis Kulzer1,2,3, Jeremy A Penner1,4, Reson Marima1, Patrick Oyaro1, Arbogast O Oyanga1, Starley B Shade1,5, Cinthia C Blat1,2, Lennah Nyabiage6, Christina W Mwachari1,7, Hellen C Muttai8, Elizabeth A Bukusi1, Craig R Cohen1,2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Nyanza Province, Kenya, had the highest HIV prevalence in the country at 14.9% in 2007, more than twice the national HIV prevalence of 7.1%. Only 16% of HIV-infected adults in the country accurately knew their HIV status. Targeted strategies to reach and test individuals are urgently needed to curb the HIV epidemic. The family unit is one important portal.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2012 PMID: 22353553 PMCID: PMC3298805 DOI: 10.1186/1758-2652-15-8
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Int AIDS Soc ISSN: 1758-2652 Impact factor: 5.396
Figure 1Family model of care. This diagram illustrates the family model of care approach. It is based on the linkage between index patients and their family members at risk. Index patients are enrolled, assisted disclosure is provided, vulnerable family members are identified and encouraged to come in for HIV testing, HIV-positive members are enrolled, prevention infection counselling is carried out for HIV-negative members, and family support and awareness is raised. Comprehensive services are designed to support the family unit.
Identification, HIV testing and enrolment into care of family members through a family-focused approach
| Index male | Index female | Index total | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| n (%) or mean | 95% CI** | n (%) or mean | 95% CI** | n (%)or mean | 95% CI** | |
| Sample size | 96 | 201 | 297 | |||
| Missing | 9 | 3 | 12 | |||
| Measures | ||||||
| Family members identified | 236 | 489 | 725 | |||
| partners identified† | 77 (33%) | (27%, 39%) | 164 (34%) | (29%, 38%) | 241 (33%) | (30%, 37%) |
| children identified† | 159 (67%) | (61%, 73%) | 325 (66%) | (62%, 71%) | 484 (67%) | (63%, 70%) |
| Family members tested for HIV† | 137 (58%) | (51%, 64%) | 315 (64%) | (60%, 69%) | 452 (62%) | (59%, 66%) |
| partners tested for HIV* | 63 (82%) | (71%, 90%) | 113 (69%) | (61%, 76%) | 176 (73%) | (67%, 79%) |
| children tested for HIV* | 74 (47%) | (39%, 55%) | 202 (62%) | (57%, 67%) | 276 (57%) | (52%, 61%) |
| Family members HIV positive* | 52 (38%) | (30%, 47%) | 123 (39%) | (33%, 45%) | 175 (39%) | (34%, 43%) |
| partners HIV positive‡ | 41 (65%) | (52%, 77%) | 84 (74%) | (65%, 82%) | 125 (71%) | (64%, 78%) |
| children HIV positive ‡ | 11 (15%) | (8%, 25%) | 39 (19%) | (14%, 25%) | 50 (18%) | (14%, 23%) |
| Family members enrolled¥ | 47 (90%) | (79%, 97%) | 107 (87%) | (80%, 92%) | 154 (88%) | (82%, 92%) |
| partners enrolled¥¥ | 39 (95%) | (83%, 99%) | 72 (86%) | (76%, 92%) | 111 (89%) | (82%, 94%) |
| children enrolled ¥¥ | 8 (73%) | (39%, 94%) | 35 (90%) | (76%, 97%) | 43 (86%) | (73%, 94%) |
| Family member identification per index patient | 2.71 | (2.33, 3.09) | 2.47 | (2.25, 2.68) | 2.54 | (2.36, 2.73) |
| Family member tests per index patient ▶▶ | 1.57 | (1.26, 1.89) | 1.59 | (1.40, 1.79) | 1.59 | (1.42, 1.75) |
† denominator is "family members identified"
* denominators are "partners identified" and "children identified"
‡ denominators are "partners tested for HIV" and "children tested for HIV"
¥ denominator is "family member HIV positive"
¥¥ denominators are "partners HIV positive" and "children HIV positive"
▶"family member reach per index patient" was calculated by taking total reached and dividing by the index N
▶▶family member tests per index patient was calculated by taking total tested and dividing by the index N
** Confidence intervals around proportions were calculated using binomial exact distribution; confidence intervals for means calculated were based on Student's T distribution.