Katherine King1, Shuba Balan1, Mariano Kanamori2, Cho-Hee Shrader2, Juan Arroyo-Flores3, Ariana Johnson2, Patrick Whiteside4, Mara Michniewicz5, Susanne Doblecki-Lewis1. 1. Division of Infectious Diseases, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL. 2. Department of Public Health Sciences, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL. 3. Military Research, Military Analytics, Fors Marsh Group, Arlington, VA. 4. Prevention305, Miami Beach, FL. 5. Florida Department of Health, Division of Disease Control and Health Protection, Bureau of Communicable Diseases, HIV/AIDS Section, HIV Prevention Program, Tallahassee, FL; and.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the feasibility, acceptability, and implementation of a HIV self-test (HIVST) program through PrEP clients' social and sexual networks. BACKGROUND: HIV testing is critical for treatment and prevention engagement. HIVST kits can overcome barriers to testing. A negative result is an opportunity to provide PrEP information. We describe implementation factors associated with engaging current Mobile PrEP (MP) clients to distribute HIVST kits and PrEP information through their networks. SETTING: Community venues in Miami-Dade County, Florida. METHODS: A baseline survey collected network information and explored distribution plans for offering HIVST kits. A follow-up survey evaluated use and distribution. A logic model describes the process of implementation and evaluation. Up to 4 Ora-Quick HIV ST kits were offered to 81 MP clients. A brief training included resources for posttest engagement. RESULTS: Forty-four percent of the kits were reported as distributed. Of 81 MP clients offered kits, 50 (62%) accepted. In a follow-up survey, 77% of MP clients distributed at least 1 kit. Fifty-six (86%) social network members were Latino, and 9 (14%) were Black. Three of 4 MP clients engaged in PrEP discussions (77%) with SN members. Reported reasons for HIVST kit use included convenience, confidentiality, privacy concerns, and discomfort with going to a testing site. MP clients reported that kit distribution was affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. CONCLUSION: HIV ST kits allowed PrEP users to engage others in their social and sexual networks for HIV testing and information regarding PrEP. Work to scale-up this intervention is underway.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the feasibility, acceptability, and implementation of a HIV self-test (HIVST) program through PrEP clients' social and sexual networks. BACKGROUND: HIV testing is critical for treatment and prevention engagement. HIVST kits can overcome barriers to testing. A negative result is an opportunity to provide PrEP information. We describe implementation factors associated with engaging current Mobile PrEP (MP) clients to distribute HIVST kits and PrEP information through their networks. SETTING: Community venues in Miami-Dade County, Florida. METHODS: A baseline survey collected network information and explored distribution plans for offering HIVST kits. A follow-up survey evaluated use and distribution. A logic model describes the process of implementation and evaluation. Up to 4 Ora-Quick HIV ST kits were offered to 81 MP clients. A brief training included resources for posttest engagement. RESULTS: Forty-four percent of the kits were reported as distributed. Of 81 MP clients offered kits, 50 (62%) accepted. In a follow-up survey, 77% of MP clients distributed at least 1 kit. Fifty-six (86%) social network members were Latino, and 9 (14%) were Black. Three of 4 MP clients engaged in PrEP discussions (77%) with SN members. Reported reasons for HIVST kit use included convenience, confidentiality, privacy concerns, and discomfort with going to a testing site. MP clients reported that kit distribution was affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. CONCLUSION: HIV ST kits allowed PrEP users to engage others in their social and sexual networks for HIV testing and information regarding PrEP. Work to scale-up this intervention is underway.
Authors: Peter L Anderson; David V Glidden; Albert Liu; Susan Buchbinder; Javier R Lama; Juan Vicente Guanira; Vanessa McMahan; Lane R Bushman; Martín Casapía; Orlando Montoya-Herrera; Valdilea G Veloso; Kenneth H Mayer; Suwat Chariyalertsak; Mauro Schechter; Linda-Gail Bekker; Esper Georges Kallás; Robert M Grant Journal: Sci Transl Med Date: 2012-09-12 Impact factor: 17.956
Authors: Robin J MacGowan; Pollyanna R Chavez; Craig B Borkowf; S Michele Owen; David W Purcell; Jonathan H Mermin; Patrick S Sullivan Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2020-01-01 Impact factor: 21.873
Authors: Laura J Damschroder; David C Aron; Rosalind E Keith; Susan R Kirsh; Jeffery A Alexander; Julie C Lowery Journal: Implement Sci Date: 2009-08-07 Impact factor: 7.327
Authors: Marguerita A Lightfoot; Chadwick K Campbell; Nicholas Moss; Sarah Treves-Kagan; Emily Agnew; Mi-Suk Kang Dufour; Hyman Scott; Aria M Saʼid; Sheri A Lippman Journal: J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr Date: 2018-09-01 Impact factor: 3.731
Authors: Sheena McCormack; David T Dunn; Monica Desai; David I Dolling; Mitzy Gafos; Richard Gilson; Ann K Sullivan; Amanda Clarke; Iain Reeves; Gabriel Schembri; Nicola Mackie; Christine Bowman; Charles J Lacey; Vanessa Apea; Michael Brady; Julie Fox; Stephen Taylor; Simone Antonucci; Saye H Khoo; James Rooney; Anthony Nardone; Martin Fisher; Alan McOwan; Andrew N Phillips; Anne M Johnson; Brian Gazzard; Owen N Gill Journal: Lancet Date: 2015-09-09 Impact factor: 79.321