| Literature DB >> 35676020 |
.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Point-of-care dual tests (POCTs) for simultaneously detecting antibodies to HIV and syphilis (dual HIV-syphilis POCTs) have been developed recently and show encouraging performance compared with the reference tests in laboratory-based studies. As community-based voluntary, counselling and testing (CBVCT) services are effective providers of HIV and syphilis testing and counselling with high acceptability among men who have sex with men (MSM), the evaluation of the utility of these dual tests in CBVCT services is a high priority. This prospective cross-sectional study will conduct a clinical utility evaluation of two dual POCTs in non-clinical settings for the screening of HIV and syphilis in MSM. This master protocol outlines the overall research approach that will be used in four countries. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: MSM presenting at CBVCT services participating in the study for HIV/STI screening will be enrolled. The (WHO preapproved) dual POCTs to be evaluated will be SD Bioline HIV/Syphilis Duo (Abbot) and Dual Path Platform HIV-Syphilis Assay (Chembio). Trained staff will collect a capillary blood sample using finger prick blood to perform both POCTs according the manufacturers' instructions. An analysis of the feasibility of introducing the dual POCT for the screening of HIV and syphilis in MSM at CBVCT services will be performed, by assessing its acceptability and usability at CBVCT service among MSM users and providers. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This core protocol was independently peer reviewed and approved by the Research Project Review Panel (RP2) of the WHO Department of Sexual and Reproductive Health and Research and by the WHO Ethics Review Committee (ERC). The protocol has been adapted to individual countries and approved by RP2, ERC and institutional review boards at each site. Results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals and relevant conferences. © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.Entities:
Keywords: HIV & AIDS; Infection control; Public health
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35676020 PMCID: PMC9185395 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-055275
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMJ Open ISSN: 2044-6055 Impact factor: 3.006
Figure 1Providers’ and users’ conceptual framework.
Acceptability and usability subdomain definitions
| Subdomains | Definition |
| Learnability | Ability of the CBVCT providers to understand how to correctly perform the dual HIV/syphilis POTCs and accurately read the test results. |
| Willingness | CBVCT providers’ intention to carry out a finger prick each time it is necessary, wait for the results, and refer the user when necessary. Regarding the CBVCT users, willingness has been defined as the intention to have the test performed on themselves, willingness to wait for test results, and if it is necessary, to follow the referral procedure. |
| Suitability | CBVCTs providers' beliefs that the test is relevant for their work and could be successfully integrated into existing services. Regarding CBVCT users, suitability has been defined as belief that the test is relevant in determining whether or not they have HIV and/or syphilis. |
| Satisfaction | CBVCT providers' feeling that the test is convenient to perform and that it is a process they like doing. Regarding the CBVCT users, satisfaction has been described as feeling that a test is convenient and that it is a process they would like to experience again. |
| Efficacy | CBVCT providers are able to make the effort and take the time to perform a test; read, interpret and record test results and also to refer the user if required, as part of their daily routine work. |
| Effectiveness | The enabling organisational and supporting systems, such as training, supervision, study aids, supplies, timers, storage and disposal are present or carried out and are integrated into existing routine protocols. |
CBVCT, community-based voluntary, counselling and testing; POCTs, point-of-care tests.
Figure 2Bioline point-of-care test.
Figure 3Chembio point-of-care test kit. DPP, dual path platform.
Figure 4DPP microreader, test device holder, DPP microreader with test device holder and test device. DPP, dual path platform.
Figure 5Patient flow chart for a clinic-based evaluation of two dual HIV/syphilis POCTs. MSM, men who have sex with men; POCTs, point-of-care tests.
Feasibility questions for providers, operational characteristics and related subdomains
| Provider–feasibility questions | |
| Learnability subdomain | |
| 1. Overall, performing dual HIV/syphilis test is (Very easy, Quite easy, Neither easy nor difficult, Quite difficult, Very difficult, Don’t know, Don’t want to answer) | |
| 2. Correctly reading and interpreting the dual HIV/syphilis text result is (Very easy, Quite easy, Neither easy nor difficult, Quite difficult, Very difficult, Don’t know, Don’t want to answer) | |
| 3. Interpreting weak positive test result is (Very easy, Quite easy, Neither easy nor difficult, Quite difficult, Very difficult, Don’t know, Don’t want to answer) | |
| 4. The training offered was enough to perform the dual test (strongly agree, agree, neither agree nor disagree, disagree, strongly disagree, don’t know, don’t want to answer) | |
| Willingness subdomain | |
| 5. I am willing to perform the dual HIV/syphilis test instead of the separate HIV and syphilis tests in my CBVCT (strongly agree, agree, neither agree nor disagree, disagree, strongly disagree, don’t know, don’t want to answer) | |
| 6. Current supporting components of the study, including training, supervision and quality maintenance are sufficient to integrate the dual HIV/syphilis test into the routine activities in my CBVCT (strongly agree, agree, neither agree nor disagree, disagree, strongly disagree, don’t know, don’t want to answer) | |
| Suitability subdomain | |
| 7. I am confident in the results of the dual HIV/syphilis test (strongly agree, agree, neither agree nor disagree, disagree, strongly disagree, don’t know, don’t want to answer) | |
| 8. Routine dual HIV/syphilis testing should continue in my CBVCT service (strongly agree, agree, neither agree nor disagree, disagree, strongly disagree, don’t know, don’t want to answer) | |
| 9. Rapid dual HIV/syphilis tests could be successfully integrated in my CBVCT (strongly agree, agree, neither agree nor disagree, disagree, strongly disagree, don’t know, don’t want to answer) | |
| Satisfaction subdomain | |
| 10. In your opinion, how do new users feel about the dual HIV/syphilis tests? (Very positive, Quite positive, Neither negative nor positive, Quite negative, Very negative, Don’t know, Don’t want to answer) | |
| 11. Use of dual testing in this CBVCT reduces the workload (strongly agree, agree, neither agree nor disagree, disagree, strongly disagree, don’t know, don’t want to answer) | |
| 12. Dual testing is more acceptable to users than separate HIV and syphilis tests (strongly agree, agree, neither agree nor disagree, disagree, strongly disagree, don’t know, don’t want to answer) | |
| 13. Introducing dual HIV/syphilis tests will decrease user waiting time at the CBVCT service (strongly agree, agree, neither agree nor disagree, disagree, strongly disagree, don’t know, don’t want to answer) | |
| Effectiveness subdomain | |
| 14. The current supplier of HIV and syphilis tests will be able to provide the dual HIV/syphilis tests (strongly agree, agree, neither agree nor disagree, disagree, strongly disagree, don’t know, don’t want to answer) | |
| 15. Dual HIV/syphilis tests can be easily integrated into the national and/or regional HIV testing guidelines (strongly agree, agree, neither agree nor disagree, disagree, strongly disagree, don’t know, don’t want to answer) | |
| Operational characteristics | |
| 1. Clarity of kit instructions (difficult to follow, fairly clear, very clear, excellent) | Learnability subdomain |
| 2. Ease of use (complicated, fairly easy, very easy, excellent) | |
| 3. Ease of interpretation of results (difficult, fairly easy, very easy, unambiguous) | |
| 4. Rapidity of tests results (<20 min, 20–30 min, >30 min) | Efficacy subdomain |
| 5. Hands-on time (<5 min, 5 min, 10 min) | |
| 6. Training time required (<30 min, 30 min, 1 hour, >1 hour) | |
| 7. No of tests needed to be performed before being able to feel comfortable with POCT | |
CBVCT, community-based voluntary, counselling and testing; POCT, point-of-care test.