Elizabeth A Kelvin1, Bridget Akasreku2. 1. Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, CUNY Graduate School of Public Health and Health Policy, and CUNY Institute for Implementation Science in Population Health, City University of New York, 55 West 125th Street, New York, NY, 10027, USA. elizabeth.kelvin@sph.cuny.edu. 2. Department of Community Health and Social Sciences, CUNY Graduate School of Public Health and Health Policy, City University of New York, 55 West 125th Street, New York, NY, 10027, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: We describe the evidence regarding the impact of offering HIV self-testing (HIVST) and explore the gaps that need to be filled to design and implement HIVST programs. RECENT FINDINGS: Numerous randomized controlled trials found that offering HIVST increases HIV testing rates. However, these trials used an oral HIVST that was provided for free and there is no research examining the impact of offering blood-based (finger prick) kits or charging for HIVST kits. The trials also used various methods for distributing the HIVST kits, but there is little research comparing distribution methods. Study participants varied in the HIV testing method they chose when given choices, suggesting that offering multiple HIV testing options may be needed to maximize testing rates. Despite the consistent finding that offering HIVST increases HIV testing rates, questions remain that need to be answered in order to maximize the potential of this new biomedical technology.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: We describe the evidence regarding the impact of offering HIV self-testing (HIVST) and explore the gaps that need to be filled to design and implement HIVST programs. RECENT FINDINGS: Numerous randomized controlled trials found that offering HIVST increases HIV testing rates. However, these trials used an oral HIVST that was provided for free and there is no research examining the impact of offering blood-based (finger prick) kits or charging for HIVST kits. The trials also used various methods for distributing the HIVST kits, but there is little research comparing distribution methods. Study participants varied in the HIV testing method they chose when given choices, suggesting that offering multiple HIV testing options may be needed to maximize testing rates. Despite the consistent finding that offering HIVST increases HIV testing rates, questions remain that need to be answered in order to maximize the potential of this new biomedical technology.
Entities:
Keywords:
HIV; HIV self-testing; Implementation science
Authors: Elizabeth A Kelvin; Sonia Cheruvillil; Stephanie Christian; Joanne E Mantell; Cecilia Milford; Letitia Rambally-Greener; Nzwakie Mosery; Ross Greener; Jennifer A Smit Journal: Afr J AIDS Res Date: 2016-07 Impact factor: 1.300
Authors: Jeffrey E Korte; Rose Kisa; Caroline J Vrana-Diaz; Angela M Malek; Esther Buregyeya; Joseph K B Matovu; Joseph Kagaayi; William Musoke; Harriet Chemusto; Semei C Mukama; Anthony Ndyanabo; Shaban Mugerwa; Rhoda K Wanyenze Journal: J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr Date: 2020-07-01 Impact factor: 3.731
Authors: Muhammad S Jamil; Garrett Prestage; Christopher K Fairley; Andrew E Grulich; Kirsty S Smith; Marcus Chen; Martin Holt; Anna M McNulty; Benjamin R Bavinton; Damian P Conway; Handan Wand; Phillip Keen; Jack Bradley; Johann Kolstee; Colin Batrouney; Darren Russell; Matthew Law; John M Kaldor; Rebecca J Guy Journal: Lancet HIV Date: 2017-02-17 Impact factor: 12.767
Authors: David A Katz; Matthew R Golden; James P Hughes; Carey Farquhar; Joanne D Stekler Journal: J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr Date: 2018-08-15 Impact factor: 3.731
Authors: Peter M Mugo; Murugi Micheni; Jimmy Shangala; Mohamed H Hussein; Susan M Graham; Tobias F Rinke de Wit; Eduard J Sanders Journal: PLoS One Date: 2017-01-26 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Chama Mulubwa; Bernadette Hensen; Mwelwa M Phiri; Kwame Shanaube; Albertus J Schaap; Sian Floyd; Comfort R Phiri; Chiti Bwalya; Virginia Bond; Musonda Simwinga; Lawrence Mwenge; Sarah Fidler; Richard Hayes; Alwyn Mwinga; Helen Ayles Journal: Lancet HIV Date: 2018-12-21 Impact factor: 16.070
Authors: Elizabeth A Kelvin; Gavin George; Samuel Kinyanjui; Eva Mwai; Matthew L Romo; Faith Oruko; Jacob O Odhiambo; Eston N Nyaga; Joanne E Mantell; Kaymarlin Govender Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2019-01-03 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Kate S Wilson; Cyrus Mugo; David A Katz; Vivianne Manyeki; Carol Mungwala; Lilian Otiso; David Bukusi; R Scott McClelland; Jane M Simoni; Matt Driver; Sarah Masyuko; Irene Inwani; Pamela K Kohler Journal: AIDS Behav Date: 2021-09-01
Authors: Phillip W Schnarrs; Mark Bond; Amy L Stone; Robert Salcido; Lindsay Young; Judith Dean; Timothy J Grigsby Journal: AIDS Behav Date: 2022-05-18
Authors: Juan Hoyos; Tomás Maté; Juan-Miguel Guerras; Marta Donat; Cristina Agustí; Matthias Kuske; Ricardo Fuertes; Sophocles Chanos; Francois Pichon; Luis Sordo; José Pulido; María-José Belza Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-04-30 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Eva van Empel; Rebecca A De Vlieg; Guy Harling; Maja E Marcus; Kathleen Kahn; Till W Bärnighausen; Livia Montana; Augustine T Choko; Jennifer Manne-Goehler Journal: AIDS Date: 2022-02-01 Impact factor: 4.632
Authors: Juan-Miguel Guerras; María-José Belza; María-José Fuster; Luis de la Fuente; Patricia García de Olalla; David Palma; Jorge-Néstor García-Pérez; Juan Hoyos Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-01-19 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Muhammad S Jamil; Ingrid Eshun-Wilson; T Charles Witzel; Nandi Siegfried; Carmen Figueroa; Lastone Chitembo; Busisiwe Msimanga-Radebe; Muhammad S Pasha; Karin Hatzold; Elizabeth Corbett; Magdalena Barr-DiChiara; Alison J Rodger; Peter Weatherburn; Elvin Geng; Rachel Baggaley; Cheryl Johnson Journal: EClinicalMedicine Date: 2021-07-07