IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pmed00/1002442.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

HIV self-testing among female sex workers in Zambia: A cluster randomized controlled trial

Author

Listed:
  • Michael M Chanda
  • Katrina F Ortblad
  • Magdalene Mwale
  • Steven Chongo
  • Catherine Kanchele
  • Nyambe Kamungoma
  • Andrew Fullem
  • Caitlin Dunn
  • Leah G Barresi
  • Guy Harling
  • Till Bärnighausen
  • Catherine E Oldenburg

Abstract

Background: HIV self-testing (HIVST) may play a role in addressing gaps in HIV testing coverage and as an entry point for HIV prevention services. We conducted a cluster randomized trial of 2 HIVST distribution mechanisms compared to the standard of care among female sex workers (FSWs) in Zambia. Methods and findings: Trained peer educators in Kapiri Mposhi, Chirundu, and Livingstone, Zambia, each recruited 6 FSW participants. Peer educator–FSW groups were randomized to 1 of 3 arms: (1) delivery (direct distribution of an oral HIVST from the peer educator), (2) coupon (a coupon for collection of an oral HIVST from a health clinic/pharmacy), or (3) standard-of-care HIV testing. Participants in the 2 HIVST arms received 2 kits: 1 at baseline and 1 at 10 weeks. The primary outcome was any self-reported HIV testing in the past month at the 1- and 4-month visits, as HIVST can replace other types of HIV testing. Secondary outcomes included linkage to care, HIVST use in the HIVST arms, and adverse events. Participants completed questionnaires at 1 and 4 months following peer educator interventions. In all, 965 participants were enrolled between September 16 and October 12, 2016 (delivery, N = 316; coupon, N = 329; standard of care, N = 320); 20% had never tested for HIV. Overall HIV testing at 1 month was 94.9% in the delivery arm, 84.4% in the coupon arm, and 88.5% in the standard-of-care arm (delivery versus standard of care risk ratio [RR] = 1.07, 95% CI 0.99–1.15, P = 0.10; coupon versus standard of care RR = 0.95, 95% CI 0.86–1.05, P = 0.29; delivery versus coupon RR = 1.13, 95% CI 1.04–1.22, P = 0.005). Four-month rates were 84.1% for the delivery arm, 79.8% for the coupon arm, and 75.1% for the standard-of-care arm (delivery versus standard of care RR = 1.11, 95% CI 0.98–1.27, P = 0.11; coupon versus standard of care RR = 1.06, 95% CI 0.92–1.22, P = 0.42; delivery versus coupon RR = 1.05, 95% CI 0.94–1.18, P = 0.40). At 1 month, the majority of HIV tests were self-tests (88.4%). HIV self-test use was higher in the delivery arm compared to the coupon arm (RR = 1.14, 95% CI 1.05–1.23, P = 0.001) at 1 month, but there was no difference at 4 months. Among participants reporting a positive HIV test at 1 (N = 144) and 4 months (N = 235), linkage to care was non-significantly lower in the 2 HIVST arms compared to the standard-of-care arm. There were 4 instances of intimate partner violence related to study participation, 3 of which were related to HIV self-test use. Limitations include the self-reported nature of study outcomes and overall high uptake of HIV testing. Conclusions: In this study among FSWs in Zambia, we found that HIVST was acceptable and accessible. However, HIVST may not substantially increase HIV cascade progression in contexts where overall testing and linkage are already high. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02827240 In a cluster-randomized trial done in Zambia, Catherine Oldenburg and colleagues study HIV self-testing for female sex workers.Why was this study done?: What did the researchers do and find?: What do these findings mean?:

Suggested Citation

  • Michael M Chanda & Katrina F Ortblad & Magdalene Mwale & Steven Chongo & Catherine Kanchele & Nyambe Kamungoma & Andrew Fullem & Caitlin Dunn & Leah G Barresi & Guy Harling & Till Bärnighausen & Cathe, 2017. "HIV self-testing among female sex workers in Zambia: A cluster randomized controlled trial," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(11), pages 1-19, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pmed00:1002442
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1002442
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1002442
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1002442&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pmed.1002442?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pmed00:1002442. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosmedicine (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.