Search

Background A prior randomized control trial showed financial incentives increase HIV testing rates for children of unknown HIV status. Translating evidence-based interventions such as these to scale requires an implementation science approach. Methods A qualitative study evaluating health care providers' perceptions of barriers and facilitators of a previously completed financial incentives intervention for pediatric HIV testing was conducted at health care facilities in Kisumu, Kenya. Six focus group discussions with 52 providers explored determinants of acceptability, feasibility, and sustainability of financial incentive scale-up for pediatric HIV testing using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research to inform question guides and thematic analysis. Results Providers found the use of financial incentive interventions for pediatric HIV testing to be highly acceptable. First, providers believed financial incentives had a relative advantage over existing strategies, because they overcame cost barriers and provided additional motivation to test; however, concerns about how financial incentives would be implemented influenced perceptions of feasibility and sustainability. Second, providers expressed concern that already overburdened staff and high costs of financial incentive programs would limit sustainability. Third, providers feared that financial incentives may negatively affect further care because of expectations of repeated financial support and program manipulation. Conclusions Providers viewed financial incentives as an acceptable intervention to scale programmatically to increase uptake of pediatric testing. To ensure feasibility and sustainability of financial incentives in pediatric HIV testing programs, it will be important to clearly define target populations, manage expectations of continued financial support, and establish systems to track testing.

Children living with HIV experience gaps in HIV testing globally; scaling up evidence-based testing strategies is critical for preventing HIV-related mortality. Financial incentives (FI) were recently demonstrated to increase uptake of pediatric HIV testing. As part of this qualitative follow-up study to the FIT trial (NCT03049917) conducted in Kenya, 54 caregivers participated in individual interviews. Interview transcripts were analyzed to identify considerations for scaling up FI for pediatric testing. Caregivers reported that FI function by directly offsetting costs or nudging caregivers to take action sooner. Caregivers found FI to be feasible and acceptable for broader programmatic implementation, and supported use for a variety of populations. Some concerns were raised about unintended consequences of FI, including caregivers bringing ineligible children to collect incentives and fears about the impact on linkage to care and retention if caregivers become dependent on FI.

Background No validated tools exist to screen for substance use or dependence in Mozambique. The aim of this study was to validate the Alcohol Use Disorder Identification Test (AUDIT) for use in primary care settings in Mozambique. Methods The study administered a final adapted Mozambican 10-item AUDIT (AUDIT-10-MZ) to 502 individuals from antenatal, postpartum, and general outpatient consultations in three Ministry of Health primary health care clinics in Sofala Province, Mozambique. The study evaluated the AUDIT-10-MZ against the MINI 5.0-MZ as a gold standard diagnostic tool. Results Using the MINI 5.0-MZ, 16 (3.2%) of the sample tested positive for alcohol dependence and 3 (0.6%) tested positive for harmful alcohol use. The full AUDIT-10-MZ had acceptable internal consistency (α = 0.74); however, the shorter AUDIT-C-MZ had a higher alpha value than the full AUDIT screener (α = 0.79). The AUDIT-10-MZ performed well for screening in primary care, achieving areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUROCs) of 0.94 (95% CI: 0.91, 0.96) for alcohol dependence. The AUDIT-C-MZ also performed well with an AUROC of 0.88 (95% CI: 0.80, 0.96) for alcohol dependence. Using a cut-off of ≥6, the AUDIT-10-MZ achieved a sensitivity of 68.8% and specificity of 92.0% for screening for alcohol dependence; a cut-off of ≥3 for the AUDIT-C-MZ achieved a sensitivity of 56.3% and specificity of 90.7%. Conclusions Both the AUDIT-10-MZ and AUDIT-C-MZ are valid instruments for screening for alcohol dependence in Mozambique. The AUDIT-C-MZ performed particularly well and providers could use it as a brief screener in primary care settings. Optimal cut-points will depend on weighing false positives and false negatives but could be employed at ≥ 6 or ≥ 7 for the AUDIT-10-MZ and at ≥ 2 or ≥ 3 for the AUDIT-C-MZ. Future implementation research is needed to examine how best to integrate screening for substance use or dependence in primary care settings in Mozambique and other similar LMICs.