A D McNaghten1, Allison Schilsky Mneimneh, Thato Farirai, Nafuna Wamai, Marylad Ntiro, Jennifer Sabatier, Nondumiso Makhunga-Ramfolo, Salli Mwanasalli, Anna Awor, Jan Moore. 1. *Department of Epidemiology, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, GA; †Division of Global HIV/AIDS, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA; ‡Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Pretoria, South Africa; §Division of Global HIV/AIDS, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Entebbe, Uganda; ‖Ministry of Health and Social Welfare, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania; ¶University Research Co., LLC, Pretoria, South Africa; and #Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine which of 3 HIV testing and counseling (HTC) models in outpatient departments (OPDs) increases HIV testing and entry of newly identified HIV-infected patients into care. DESIGN: Randomized trial of HTC interventions. METHODS:Thirty-six OPDs in South Africa, Tanzania, and Uganda were randomly assigned to 3 different HTC models: (A) health care providers referred eligible patients (aged 18-49, not tested in the past year, not known HIV positive) to on-site voluntary counseling and testing for HTC offered and provided by voluntary counseling and testing counselors after clinical consultation; (B) health care providers offered and provided HTC to eligible patients during clinical consultation; and (C) nurse or lay counselors offered and provided HTC to eligible patients before clinical consultation. Data were collected from October 2011 to September 2012. We describe testing eligibility and acceptance, HIV prevalence, and referral and entry into care. Chi-square analyses were conducted to examine differences by model. RESULTS:Of 79,910 patients, 45% were age eligible and 16,099 (45%) age eligibles were tested. Ten percent tested HIV positive. Significant differences were found in percent tested by model. The proportion of age eligible patients tested by Project STATUS was highest for model C (54.1%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 42.4 to 65.9), followed by model A (41.7%, 95% CI: 30.7 to 52.8), and then model B (33.9%, 95% CI: 25.7 to 42.1). Of the 1596 newly identified HIV positive patients, 94% were referred to care (96.1% in model A, 94.7% in model B, and 94.9% in model C), and 58% entered on-site care (74.4% in model A, 54.8% in model B, and 55.6% in model C) with no significant differences in referrals or care entry by model. CONCLUSIONS: Model C resulted in the highest proportion of all age-eligible patients receiving a test. Although 94% of STATUS patients with a positive test result were referred to care, only 58% entered care. We found no differences in patients entering care by HTC model. Routine HTC in OPDs is acceptable to patients and effective for identifying HIV-infected persons, but additional efforts are needed to increase entry to care.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To determine which of 3 HIV testing and counseling (HTC) models in outpatient departments (OPDs) increases HIV testing and entry of newly identified HIV-infectedpatients into care. DESIGN: Randomized trial of HTC interventions. METHODS: Thirty-six OPDs in South Africa, Tanzania, and Uganda were randomly assigned to 3 different HTC models: (A) health care providers referred eligible patients (aged 18-49, not tested in the past year, not known HIV positive) to on-site voluntary counseling and testing for HTC offered and provided by voluntary counseling and testing counselors after clinical consultation; (B) health care providers offered and provided HTC to eligible patients during clinical consultation; and (C) nurse or lay counselors offered and provided HTC to eligible patients before clinical consultation. Data were collected from October 2011 to September 2012. We describe testing eligibility and acceptance, HIV prevalence, and referral and entry into care. Chi-square analyses were conducted to examine differences by model. RESULTS: Of 79,910 patients, 45% were age eligible and 16,099 (45%) age eligibles were tested. Ten percent tested HIV positive. Significant differences were found in percent tested by model. The proportion of age eligible patients tested by Project STATUS was highest for model C (54.1%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 42.4 to 65.9), followed by model A (41.7%, 95% CI: 30.7 to 52.8), and then model B (33.9%, 95% CI: 25.7 to 42.1). Of the 1596 newly identified HIV positive patients, 94% were referred to care (96.1% in model A, 94.7% in model B, and 94.9% in model C), and 58% entered on-site care (74.4% in model A, 54.8% in model B, and 55.6% in model C) with no significant differences in referrals or care entry by model. CONCLUSIONS: Model C resulted in the highest proportion of all age-eligible patients receiving a test. Although 94% of STATUS patients with a positive test result were referred to care, only 58% entered care. We found no differences in patients entering care by HTC model. Routine HTC in OPDs is acceptable to patients and effective for identifying HIV-infectedpersons, but additional efforts are needed to increase entry to care.
Authors: Stephanie M Topp; Julien M Chipukuma; Matimba M Chiko; Chibesa S Wamulume; Carolyn Bolton-Moore; Stewart E Reid Journal: Bull World Health Organ Date: 2011-03-31 Impact factor: 9.408
Authors: Rhoda K Wanyenze; Cecilia Nawavvu; Alice S Namale; Bernard Mayanja; Rebecca Bunnell; Betty Abang; Gideon Amanyire; Nelson K Sewankambo; Moses R Kamya Journal: Bull World Health Organ Date: 2008-04 Impact factor: 9.408
Authors: Lauren E Cain; Roger Logan; James M Robins; Jonathan A C Sterne; Caroline Sabin; Loveleen Bansi; Amy Justice; Joseph Goulet; Ard van Sighem; Frank de Wolf; Heiner C Bucher; Viktor von Wyl; Anna Esteve; Jordi Casabona; Julia del Amo; Santiago Moreno; Remonie Seng; Laurence Meyer; Santiago Perez-Hoyos; Roberto Muga; Sara Lodi; Emilie Lanoy; Dominique Costagliola; Miguel A Hernan Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2011-04-19 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Ivy Mannoh; Danielle Amundsen; Gnilane Turpin; Carrie E Lyons; Nikita Viswasam; Elizabeth Hahn; Sofia Ryan; Stefan Baral; Bhakti Hansoti Journal: AIDS Behav Date: 2021-11-19
Authors: Matthew D Hickey; Thomas A Odeny; Maya Petersen; Torsten B Neilands; Nancy Padian; Nathan Ford; Zachary Matthay; David Hoos; Meg Doherty; Chris Beryer; Stefan Baral; Elvin H Geng Journal: Implement Sci Date: 2017-08-08 Impact factor: 7.327
Authors: Clara A Agutu; Tony H Oduor; Bernadette K Kombo; Peter M Mugo; Salome M Chira; Fred W Ogada; Tobias F Rinke de Wit; Wairimu Chege; Elise M van der Elst; Susan M Graham; Eduard J Sanders Journal: PLoS One Date: 2021-02-05 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Simon G Agolory; Andrew F Auld; Solomon Odafe; Ray W Shiraishi; E Kainne Dokubo; Mahesh Swaminathan; Ibrahim Dalhatu; Dennis Onotu; Oseni Abiri; Henry Debem; Adebobola Bashorun; Tedd V Ellerbrock Journal: PLoS One Date: 2017-09-01 Impact factor: 3.240