INTRODUCTION: Faced with the lack of human resources manage people living with HIV/AIDS (PLWHA) in developing countries, community health workers (CHWs) provide support to health professionals. The objective of this study was to describe the characteristics of CHWs and study the impact of their intervention on HIV care. A literature search was performed on Pubmed and the websites of international organizations. METHODS: A literature review was conducted, including studies describing the impact of the CHWs' intervention on the care of PLWHA. RESULTS: Thirteen articles were selected concerning twelve studies. The names and functions of CHWs are multiple; training and remuneration are very heterogeneous. Nevertheless, the impact of their intervention appears to be positive. Trials comparing community-based care versus hospital care show no difference between the two in terms of survival, retention, viral load or CD4 counts. The support provided by CHWs improves quality of life, compliance and self-confidence and decreases stigma (qualitative studies). It also allows coverage of previously remote areas. CONCLUSION: CHWs have various names, functions, formations and salaries. Their actions appear to have a positive impact both on the therapeutic management of PLHIV and on strengthening health systems. Recognition of CHWs by health systems remains marginal and remains a public health priority.
INTRODUCTION: Faced with the lack of human resources manage people living with HIV/AIDS (PLWHA) in developing countries, community health workers (CHWs) provide support to health professionals. The objective of this study was to describe the characteristics of CHWs and study the impact of their intervention on HIV care. A literature search was performed on Pubmed and the websites of international organizations. METHODS: A literature review was conducted, including studies describing the impact of the CHWs' intervention on the care of PLWHA. RESULTS: Thirteen articles were selected concerning twelve studies. The names and functions of CHWs are multiple; training and remuneration are very heterogeneous. Nevertheless, the impact of their intervention appears to be positive. Trials comparing community-based care versus hospital care show no difference between the two in terms of survival, retention, viral load or CD4 counts. The support provided by CHWs improves quality of life, compliance and self-confidence and decreases stigma (qualitative studies). It also allows coverage of previously remote areas. CONCLUSION: CHWs have various names, functions, formations and salaries. Their actions appear to have a positive impact both on the therapeutic management of PLHIV and on strengthening health systems. Recognition of CHWs by health systems remains marginal and remains a public health priority.