Search

The HPTN 071 (PopART) trial of universal HIV testing and treatment to reduce HIV incidence was conducted in nine communities in South Africa and 12 in Zambia. The trial's primary outcome results were complicated to explain. Dissemination of these complicated results in participating communities in Zambia was done using a community dialogue approach. The approach, which involved interactive activities and a gradual and systematic approach to discussion of results in each community, facilitated respect and inclusion of participants in the dissemination process. The use of local language, pictures, images, and familiar analogies enhanced comprehension of the findings and created a two-way communication process between researchers and participants. The dialogue approach enabled both groups to use community perspectives, lived experiences, and local socio-structural features to interpret the trial results. Further, community members reflected on what the results meant to them individually and collectively. Although this community dialogue was both productive and appreciated, making this community interpretation apparent across disciplines in key quantitative scientific outputs remained a challenge.

Background Meningitis causes significant mortality in regions with high comorbid HIV and TB. Improved outcomes are hindered by limited understanding of factors that delay adequate care. Methods In-depth interviews of patients admitted to the University Teaching Hospital with suspected meningitis, their caregivers, doctors and nurses were conducted. Patient/caregiver interviews explored meningitis understanding, treatment prior to admission and experiences since admission. Provider interviews addressed current and prior experiences with meningitis patients and hospital barriers to care. A conceptual framework based on the Three Delays Model identified factors that delayed care. Results Twenty-six patient/caregiver, eight doctor and eight nurse interviews occurred. Four delays were identified: in-home care; transportation to a health facility; clinic/first-level hospital care; and third-level hospital. Overcrowding and costly diagnostic testing delayed outpatient care; 23% of patients began with treatment inside the home due to prior negative experiences with biomedical care. Admission occurred after multiple clinic visits, where subsequent delays occurred during testing and treatment. Conclusions Delays in care from home to hospital impair quality meningitis care in Zambia. Interventions to improve outcomes must address patient, community and health systems factors. Patient/caregiver education regarding signs of meningitis and indications for care-seeking are warranted to reduce treatment delays.

Community delivery of Antiretroviral therapy (ART) is a novel innovation to increase sustainable ART coverage for People living with HIV (PLHIV) in resource limited settings. Within a nested cluster-randomised sub-study in two urban communities that participated in the HPTN 071 (PopART) trial in Zambia we investigated individual acceptability and preferences for ART delivery models. Stable PLHIV were enrolled in a cluster-randomized trial of three different models of ART: Facility-based delivery (SoC), Home-based delivery (HBD) and Adherence clubs (AC). Consenting individuals were asked to express their stated preference for ART delivery options. Those assigned to the community models of ART delivery arms could choose (“revealed preference”) between the assigned arm and facility-based delivery. In total 2489 (99.6%) eligible individuals consented to the study and 95.6% chose community models of ART delivery rather than facility-based delivery when offered a choice. When asked to state their preference of model of ART delivery, 67.6% did not state a preference of one model over another, 22.8% stated a preference for HBD, 5.0% and 4.6% stated a preference for AC and SoC, respectively. Offering PLHIV choices of community models of ART delivery is feasible and acceptable with majority expressing HBD as their stated preferred option.

IntroductionHIV self-testing (HIVST) across sub-Saharan African countries may be acceptable as it overcomes significant barriers to clinic-based HIV testing services such as privacy and confidentiality. There are a number of suggested HIVST distribution models. However, they may not be responsive to the testing service needs of adolescents and young people (AYP). We will investigate the knowledge, acceptability and social implications of a peer-to-peer distribution model of HIVST kits on uptake of HIV prevention including pre-exposure prophylaxis, condoms, and voluntary medical male circumcision and testing services and linkage to anti-retroviral therapy among AYP aged 15–24 in Zambia and Uganda.Methods and analysisWe will conduct an exploratory mixed methods study among AYP aged 15–24 in Uganda and Zambia. Qualitative data will be collected using audio-recorded in-depth interviews (IDIs), focus group discussions (FGDs), and participant observations. All IDIs and FGDs will be transcribed verbatim, coded and analysed through a thematic-content analysis. The quantitative data will be collected through a structured survey questionnaire derived from the preliminary findings of the qualitative work and programme evaluation quantitative data collected on uptake of services from a Zambian trial. The quantitative phase will evaluate the number of AYP reached and interested in HIVST and the implication of this on household social relations and social harms. The quantitative data will be analysed through bivariate analyses. The study will explore any social–cultural and study design barriers or facilitators to uptake of HIVST.Ethics and disseminationThis study is approved by the Uganda Virus Research Institute Research and Ethics committee, Uganda National Council for Science and Technology, University of Zambia Biomedical Ethics Committee, Zambia National Health Research Authority and the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine. Dissemination activities will involve publications in peer-reviewed journals, presentations at conferences and stakeholder meetings in the communities.

Zambia is experiencing structural financial distress marked by high levels of severe/food poverty, chronic poverty and impoverishment. Poverty trends are strongly linked to environmental sustainability issues, such as deteriorating fish stocks, soil fertility, drought and floods, and disaster risk. They are also underpinned with further effects such as inability to cope with health shocks, early marriages and divorces, and alcoholism. Long term urban-rural, inter-provincial and gender inequalities are exacerbated by highly contested politics with weak policy development and implementation, both of which sets of contextual factors significantly constrain state action on poverty reduction. The context is also one of macro-economic vulnerability— Zambia is still an LDC, mineral dependent, revenue-deficit and debt-distressed. The 2010s witnessed a recent period of sharp shocks to the incomes of the poor (2016 - 2019) preceded by years of systemic stressors driving a slower decline in income, savings and assets which increased the vulnerability to the recent shocks faced by households and the onset of Covid 19. In this context, policy priorities would include stabilising farm incomes, developing a stronger household asset base, focusing on resource conservation in farming and fisheries, and building a stronger and earlier policy response to disasters.

BACKGROUND: Non-facility-based antiretroviral therapy (ART) delivery for people with stable HIV might increase sustainable ART coverage in low-income and middle-income countries. Within the HPTN 071 (PopART) trial, two interventions, home-based delivery (HBD) and adherence clubs (AC), which included groups of 15-30 participants who met at a communal venue, were compared with standard of care (SoC). In this trial we looked at the effectiveness and feasibility of these alternative models of care. Specifically, this trial aimed to assess whether these models of care had similar virological suppression to that of SoC 12 months after enrolment. METHODS: This was a three-arm, cluster-randomised, non-inferiority trial, done in two urban communities in Lusaka, Zambia included in the HPTN 071 trial. The two communities were split into zones, which were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to the three treatment strategies: 35 zones to the SoC group, 35 zones to the HBD group, and 34 zones to the AC group. ART and adherence support were delivered once every 3 months at home for the HBD group, in groups of 15-30 people in the AC group, or in the clinic for the SoC group. Adults with HIV who were receiving first-line ART for at least 6 months, virally suppressed using national HIV guidelines in the last 12 months, had no other health conditions requiring the clinicians attention, live in the study catchment area, and provided written informed consent, were eligible for inclusion. The primary endpoint was viral suppression at 12 months (with a 6 month final measurement window [ie, 9-15 months]), defined as less than 1000 HIV RNA copies per mL, with a non-inferiority margin of 5%. FINDINGS: Between May 5 and Dec 19, 2017, 9900 individuals were screened for inclusion, of whom 2489 (25·1%) participants were enrolled into the trial: 781 (31%) in the SoC group, 852 (34%) in the HBD group, and 856 (34%) in the AC group. A higher proportion of participants had viral load measurements in the primary outcome window in the HBD (581 [61%]of 852 participants) and AC (485 [57%] of 856 participants) groups than in the SoC (390 [50%] of 781 patients) group (p=0·0021). Of the 1096 missing observations, 152 (13·8%) were attributable to either deaths (25 [16%] participants), relocations (37 [24%] participants), or lost to follow-up (90 [59%]); 690 (63·0%) participants had viral load results outside the window period; and 254 (23·2%) did not have a viral load result. The prevalence of viral suppression was estimated to be 98·3% (95% CI 96·6 to 99·7) in the SoC group, 98·7% (97·5 to 99·6) in the HBD group, and 99·2% (98·4 to 99·8) in the AC group. This gave an estimated risk difference of 0·3% (95% CI -1·5 to 2·4) for the HBD group compared with the SoC group and 0·9% (-0·8 to 2·8) for the AC group compared with the SoC group. There was strong evidence (p

The global expansion of HIV testing, prevention and treatment services is necessary to achieve HIV epidemic control and promote individual and population health benefits for people living with HIV (PLHIV) in sub-Saharan Africa. Community-based health workers (CHWs) could play a key role in supporting implementation at scale. In the HPTN 071 (PopART) trial in Zambia and South Africa, a cadre of 737 study-specific CHWs, working closely with government-employed CHW, were deployed to deliver a ‘universal’ door-to-door HIV prevention package, including an annual offer of HIV testing and referral services for all households in 14 study communities. We conducted a process evaluation using qualitative and quantitative data collected during the trial (2013–2018) to document the implementation of the CHW intervention in practice. We focused on the recruitment, retention, training and support of CHWs, as they delivered study-specific services. We then used these descriptions to: (i) analyse the fidelity to design of the delivery of the intervention package, and (ii) suggest key insights for the transferability of the intervention to other settings. The data included baseline quantitative data collected with the study-specific CHWs (2014–2018); and qualitative data from key informant interviews with study management (n = 91), observations of CHW training events (n = 12) and annual observations of and group discussions (GD) with intervention staff (n = 68). We show that it was feasible for newly recruited CHWs to implement the PopART intervention with good fidelity, supporting the interpretation of the trial outcome findings. This was despite some challenges in managing service quality and CHW retention in the early years of the programme. We suggest that by prioritizing the adoption of key elements of the in-home HIV services delivery intervention model—including training, emotional support to workers, monitoring and appropriate remuneration for CHWs—these services could be successfully transferred to new settings.

Additional file 1.

Background HPTN 071 (PopART) was a community-randomized trial of a universal testing-and-treatment intervention on HIV incidence at population level in Zambia and South Africa. In Zambia, a trial of community-based distribution of HIV self-testing (HIVST) kits, including secondary distribution, as an option for HIV-testing was nested within 4 PopART intervention communities. We used data from the intervention arm of the nested trial to measure levels of and factors associated with acceptance and use of secondary distribution HIVST kits. Methods Community HIV care providers offered the PopART combination HIV-prevention intervention door-to-door, systematically visiting all households and enumerating all household members. From 1 February to 30 April 2017, individuals aged 16 years and older consenting to PopART were offered the option to HIV self-test, if eligible for HIV-testing services. Individuals aged 18 years and older who reported a partner absent during household visits were offered an HIVST kit for secondary distribution to this partner. We used two data sources to measure acceptance and use of secondary distribution HIVST kits. Results Among 9105 individuals aged 18 years and older consenting to PopART, 9.1% (n = 825) accepted an HIVST kit for secondary distribution. Approximately 55.8% reported that the kit had been used. Women were more likely to accept, and men more likely to use, secondary distribution HIVST kits. Kits were more likely to be used by individuals aged 30+ and who had not participated in a previous round of PopART. Approximately 6.8% had a reactive result. Conclusions Community-based secondary distribution of HIVST kits reached men absent during community HIV care provider household visits and is a complement to facility- and community-based HIV-testing services, which often miss men.

We describe and reflect on a rapid qualitative survey approach called “Broad Brush Survey” (BBS) used in six community-randomized trials (CRTs)/studies in Zambia and South Africa (2004–2018) to document, compare, classify, and communicate community features systematically for public health and multidisciplinary research ends. BBS is based on a set sequence of participatory qualitative methods and fieldwork carried out prior to a CRT intervention and/or research by social scientists to generate rapid community profiles using four key indicators: physical features, social organization, networks, and community narratives. Profiling makes apparent similarities and differences, enabling comparison across communities and can be facilitated by an ideal model of open-closed systems. Findings have provided practical outputs (e.g., community profiles) and academic opportunities (e.g., community typologies). The BBS approach enables complex social landscapes to be incorporated in CRTs. This method has proven to be useful, adaptable and to have multidisciplinary appeal.

Background Door-to-door distribution of HIV self-testing kits (HIVST) has the potential to increase uptake of HIV testing services (HTS). However, very few studies have explored the social response to and implications of door-to-door including secondary distribution of HIVST on household relations and the ability of individuals to self-test with or without supervision within households. Methods A CRT of HIVST distribution was nested within the HPTN 071 (PopART) trial, in four Zambian communities randomised to receive the PopART intervention. The nested HIVST trial aimed to increase knowledge of HIV status at population level. Between February 1 and April 30, 2017, 66 zones (clusters) within these four communities were randomly allocated to either the PopART standard of care door-to-door HTS (33 clusters) or PopART standard of care door-to-door HTS plus oral HIVST (33 clusters). In clusters randomised to HIVST, trained Community HIV care provider (CHiPs) visited households and offered individuals aged ≥ 16 and eligible for an offer of HTS the choice of HIV testing using HIVST or routine door-to-door HTS (finger-prick RDT). To document participants’ experiences with HIVST, Interviews (n = 40), observations (n = 22) and group discussions (n = 91) with household members and CHiPs were conducted. Data were coded using Atlas.ti 7 and analysed thematically. Results The usage and storage of HIVST kits was facilitated by familiarity with and trust in CHiPs, the novelty of HIVST, and demonstrations and supervision provided by CHiPs. Door-to-door distribution of HIVST kits was appreciated for being novel, convenient, private, empowering, autonomous and easy-to-use. Literacy and age influenced accurate usage of HIVST kits. The novelty of using oral fluids to test for HIV raised questions, some anxiety and doubts about the accuracy of HIVST. Although HIVST protected participants from experiencing clinic-based stigma, it did not address self-stigma. Within households, HIVST usually strengthened relationships but, amongst couples, there were a few reports of social harms. Conclusion Door-to-door distribution of HIVST as a choice for how to HIV test is appreciated at community level and provides an important testing option in the sub-Saharan context. However, it should be accompanied by counselling to manage social harms and by supporting those testing HIV-positive to link to care.

In the originally published version of this manuscript, the spelling of the co-author’s name was incorrect. The name should be “Mubekapi-Musadaidzwa” but is listed as “Mubekapi-Muzadaidzwa”. This error has now been corrected online.

To achieve UNAIDS 90:90:90 targets at population-level, knowledge of HIV status must be followed by timely linkage to care, initiation and maintenance of antiretroviral therapy (ART) for all people living with HIV (PLHIV). Interpreting quantitative patterns using qualitative data, we investigate time taken to link to care and initiate ART amongst individuals aware of their HIV-status in high HIV-prevalence urban communities in the HPTN 071 (PopART) study, a community-randomised trial of a combination HIV prevention package, including universal testing and treatment, in 21 communities in Zambia and South Africa. Data are drawn from the seven intervention communities where immediate ART irrespective if CD4 count was offered from the trial-start in 2014. Median time from HIV-diagnosis to ART initiation reduced after 2 years of delivering the intervention from 10 to 6 months in both countries but varied by gender and community of residence. Social and health system realities impact decisions made by PLHIV about ART initiation.

The HPTN 071 (PopART) cluster-randomised trial provided door-to-door HIV testing services to a large proportion of individuals residing in 21 intervention communities in Zambia and South Africa from 2014 to 2017 and reached the UNAIDS first 90 target among women in Zambia, yet gaps remained among men and young adults. This cluster-randomised study nested in the HPTN 071 (PopART) trial sought to increase knowledge of HIV status across all groups by offering the choice of oral HIV self-testing in addition to routine door-to-door HIV testing services.We nested this cluster-randomised trial in four HTPN 071 (PopART) intervention communities in northern Zambia. 66 zones (clusters) in these communities were randomly allocated (1:1) to either oral HIV self-testing plus routine door-to-door HIV testing services (HIV self-testing group) or the PopART standard of care of door-to-door HIV testing services alone (non- HIV self-testing group) over a 3-month period. All individuals aged 16 years or older were eligible for HIV testing. Randomisation was achieved by randomly selecting one allocation from a list of 10 000 possible allocations during a public ceremony. In HIV self-testing zones, trained lay-counsellors (known as community HIV care providers) visited households and offered eligible individuals the choice of HIV testing using HIV self-testing or routine door-to-door HIV testing services. For individuals aged 18 years or older whose partner was absent during the household visit, an HIV self-test kit could be left for secondary distribution to the absent partner. The primary outcome was knowledge of HIV status (defined as self-reporting HIV positive to the community HIV care providers or accepting an offer of HIV testing services). Outcomes were measured among households that were first visited, and individuals first enumerated as a household member during the HIV self-testing intervention period. We analysed data at the individual level using population-average logistic regression models, accounting for clustering of outcomes by zone, to estimate the effect of the intervention. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02994329.Between Feb 1, and April 30, 2017, the community HIV care providers enumerated 13 267 eligible individuals in the HIV self-testing group and 13 706 in the non-HIV self-testing group. After intervention implementation, 9027 (68%) of 13 267 in the HIV self-testing group had knowledge of HIV status compared with 8952 (65%) of 13 706 in the non-HIV self-testing group (adjusted odds ratio 1·30, 95% CI 1·03-1·65; p=0·03). The effect differed by sex (pProviding a choice of HIV self-testing during delivery of door-to-door HIV testing services increased knowledge of HIV status, driven by an effect among men. Lay counsellors have a vital role to play in adapting HIV self-testing interventions to local context.The International Initiative for Impact Evaluation (3ie), the BillMelinda Gates Foundation, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institute on Drug Abuse, National Institute of Mental Health, and the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief.

Supplemental material, QHR809940_Supplemental_Material_REV4 for Value and Limitations of Broad Brush Surveys Used in Community-Randomized Trials in Southern Africa by Virginia Bond, Fredrick Ngwenya, Emma Murray, Nothando Ngwenya, Lario Viljoen, Dumile Gumede, Chiti Bwalya, Jabulile Mantantana, Graeme Hoddinott, Peter J. Dodd, Helen Ayles, Musonda Simwinga, Sandra Wallman and Janet Seeley in Qualitative Health Research

Supplemental material, BBSinCRTS_Table5__Resubmission_Supplementary_20180803 for Value and Limitations of Broad Brush Surveys Used in Community-Randomized Trials in Southern Africa by Virginia Bond, Fredrick Ngwenya, Emma Murray, Nothando Ngwenya, Lario Viljoen, Dumile Gumede, Chiti Bwalya, Jabulile Mantantana, Graeme Hoddinott, Peter J. Dodd, Helen Ayles, Musonda Simwinga, Sandra Wallman and Janet Seeley in Qualitative Health Research