IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pgph00/0001438.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Acceptability, feasibility, and accuracy of blood-based HIV self-testing: A cross-sectional study in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam

Author

Listed:
  • Bao Vu Ngoc
  • Mohammed Majam
  • Kimberly Green
  • Ton Tran
  • Minh Tran Hung
  • Anh Luong Que
  • Diep Bui Ngoc
  • Chuong Hoang Le Duy

Abstract

HIV self-testing (HIVST) is an effective approach to increase testing uptake. While oral fluid-based HIVST has been rapidly scaled, use of blood-based HIVST remains limited. We evaluated the acceptability, feasibility, and accuracy of blood-based HIVST among lay users in Ho Chi Minh City (HCMC), Vietnam. We conducted a cross-sectional study among HIV testing clients at the HCMC Pasteur Institute from March 2019 to October 2020. Participants received one HIVST kit and performed the test in front of an observer. The observer used product-specific questionnaires to collect information on the HIVST process, test results, experiences. The participants’ interpretations of HIVST results were compared to health staff’s interpretations and gold standard laboratory EIA reference tests. Of 2,399 participants who accepted HIVST, 64.7% were men, 62.1% aged 25–49 years, 53.5% had a higher education level, 41.4% were employed, and 35.6% were first-time testers. The vast majority (94.4%) desired to use the test in the future, and 93.9% reported willingness to recommend the test. The majority (90.8%) of participants successfully completed the self-test. One factor associated with successful completion was higher education level (aOR = 1.85; 95% CI: 1.32–2.61); while participants self-testing with SURE CHECK (aOR = 0.21; 95% CI: 0.12–0.37), INSTI (aOR = 0.23; 95% CI: 0.13–0.39), and BioSURE (aOR = 0.29; 95% CI: 0.17–0.51) or being unemployed, retired, or doing housework (aOR = 0.45; 95% CI: 0.25–0.82) were less likely to perform the test successfully. Agreement of positive and negative HIVST results as interpreted by participants and health staff was high (98.1% and 99.9%, respectively). Sensitivity and specificity of the evaluated HIVST were 96.43% (95% CI: 93.62–99.23) and 99.9% (95% CI: 99.75–100), respectively. Our findings confirm that blood-based HIVST is highly acceptable, feasible, and accurate. This evidence informs scale-up of HIVST to increase uptake of essential HIV prevention and treatment services.

Suggested Citation

  • Bao Vu Ngoc & Mohammed Majam & Kimberly Green & Ton Tran & Minh Tran Hung & Anh Luong Que & Diep Bui Ngoc & Chuong Hoang Le Duy, 2023. "Acceptability, feasibility, and accuracy of blood-based HIV self-testing: A cross-sectional study in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam," PLOS Global Public Health, Public Library of Science, vol. 3(2), pages 1-17, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pgph00:0001438
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pgph.0001438
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/globalpublichealth/article?id=10.1371/journal.pgph.0001438
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/globalpublichealth/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pgph.0001438&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pgph.0001438?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:plo:pone00:0046555 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. repec:plo:pone00:0079772 is not listed on IDEAS
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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:pgph00:0001438. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: globalpubhealth (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/globalpublichealth .

    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.