IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0222942.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Rollout of ShangRing circumcision with active surveillance for adverse events and monitoring for uptake in Kenya

Author

Listed:
  • Elijah Odoyo-June
  • Nandi Owuor
  • Saida Kassim
  • Stephanie Davis
  • Kawango Agot
  • Kennedy Serrem
  • George Otieno
  • Quentin Awori
  • Jonas Hines
  • Carlos Toledo
  • Catey Laube
  • Christine Kisia
  • Appolonia Aoko
  • Vincent Ojiambo
  • Zebedee Mwandi
  • Ambrose Juma
  • Bartilol Kigen

Abstract

Introduction: Since 2011, Kenya has been evaluating ShangRing device for use in its voluntary medical male circumcision (VMMC) program according to World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines. Compared to conventional surgical circumcision, the ShangRing procedure is shorter, does not require suturing and gives better cosmetic outcomes. After a pilot evaluation of ShangRing in 2011, Kenya conducted an active surveillance for adverse events associated with its use from 2016–2018 to further assess its safety, uptake and to identify any operational bottlenecks to its widespread use based on data from a larger pool of procedures in routine health care settings. Methods: From December 2017 to August 2018, HIV-negative VMMC clients aged 13 years or older seeking VMMC at six sites across five counties in Kenya were offered ShangRing under injectable local anesthetic as an alternative to conventional surgical circumcision. Providers described both procedures to clients before letting them make a choice. Outcome measures recorded for clients who chose ShangRing included the proportions who were clinically eligible, had successful device placement, experienced adverse events (AEs), or failed to return for device removal. Clients failing to return for follow up were sought through phone calls, text messages or home visits to ensure removal and complete information on adverse events. Results: Out of 3,692 eligible clients 1,079 (29.2%) chose ShangRing; of these, 11 (1.0%) were excluded due to ongoing clinical conditions, 17 (1.6%) underwent conventional surgery due to lack of appropriate device size at the time of the procedure, 97.3% (1051/1079) had ShangRing placement. Uptake of ShangRing varied from 11% to 97% across different sites. There was one severe AE, a failed ShangRing placement (0.1%) managed by conventional wound suturing, plus two moderate AEs (0.2%), post removal wound dehiscence and bleeding, that resolved without sequelae. The overall AE rate was 0.3%. All clients returned for device removal from fifth to eleventh day after placement. Conclusion: ShangRing circumcision is effective and safe in the Kenyan context but its uptake varies widely in different settings. It should be rolled out under programmatic implementation for eligible males to take advantage of its unique benefits and the freedom of choice beyond conventional surgical MMC. Public education on its availability and unique advantages is necessary to optimize its uptake and to actualize the benefit of its inclusion in VMMC programs.

Suggested Citation

  • Elijah Odoyo-June & Nandi Owuor & Saida Kassim & Stephanie Davis & Kawango Agot & Kennedy Serrem & George Otieno & Quentin Awori & Jonas Hines & Carlos Toledo & Catey Laube & Christine Kisia & Appolon, 2019. "Rollout of ShangRing circumcision with active surveillance for adverse events and monitoring for uptake in Kenya," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(9), pages 1-13, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0222942
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0222942
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0222942
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0222942&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0222942?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:pone00:0222942. 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.