Deciding where and how to be tested for HIV: what matters most?

HIV and STI Testing Preferences for Men Who Have Sex with Men in High-Income Countries: A Scoping Review

Background: Regular testing for HIV and other sexually transmitted infections (STI) is recommended at least annually for sexually active men who have sex with men (MSM) in most high-income countries. To encourage regular use of HIV and STI testing and treatment services for MSM, we reviewed the literature to summarise the attributes of an HIV/STI testing service that MSM prefer. Method: We conducted a scoping review, searching PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO and CINAHL in January 2020 for articles reporting primary data on the preferences of MSM (living in high-income countries) for HIV/STI testing services. Two reviewers independently screened titles and abstracts and any discrepancies were resolved by a third reviewer. We extracted data on the service attributes that MSM preferred and summarised these thematically using a socioecological framework. Results: In total, 1464 publications were identified, 220 full texts were read and 57 were included in the final analysis. We found 21 articles addressing ‘individual’ attributes, 50 articles addressing ‘service’ attributes and 17 articles addressing ‘societal’ attributes. The key themes of preferences for HIV/STI testing services were: (1) the appeal of self-testing due to convenience and privacy; (2) the need to provide a variety of testing options; and (3) the influence of the testing experience, including confidentiality and privacy, tester characteristics and stigma. There were distinct patterns of preferences for subpopulations of MSM across studies, such as the preference of self-testing for young MSM, and of in-clinic testing for those who perceived themselves as high risk (i.e., with symptoms of STIs or exposed to a partner living with HIV). Conclusion: To make HIV/STI testing more accessible for MSM and encourage regular screening, it is important to address ‘individual’, ‘service’ and ‘societal’ attributes, such as enhancing the convenience of testing through self-testing, and providing a service that men feel comfortable and safe accessing. Furthermore, services should accommodate the preferences of diverse sub-populations within the MSM community.

HIV Self-Testing Increases HIV Testing Frequency in High-Risk Men Who Have Sex With Men: A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Self-testing may increase HIV testing and decrease the time people with HIV are unaware of their status, but there is concern that absence of counseling may result in increased HIV risk.

SETTING

Seattle, Washington.

METHODS

We randomly assigned 230 high-risk HIV-negative men who have sex with men to have access to oral fluid HIV self-tests at no cost versus testing as usual for 15 months. The primary outcome was self-reported number of HIV tests during follow-up. To evaluate self-testing's impact on sexual behavior, we compared the following between arms: non-HIV-concordant condomless anal intercourse and number of male condomless anal intercourse partners in the last 3 months (measured at 9 and 15 months) and diagnosis with a bacterial sexually transmitted infection (STI: early syphilis, gonorrhea, and chlamydial infection) at the final study visit (15 months). A post hoc analysis compared the number of STI tests reported during follow-up.

RESULTS

Men randomized to self-testing reported significantly more HIV tests during follow-up (mean = 5.3, 95% confidence interval = 4.7 to 6.0) than those randomized to testing as usual (3.6, 3.2 to 4.0; P < 0.0001), representing an average increase of 1.7 tests per participant over 15 months. Men randomized to self-testing reported using an average of 3.9 self-tests. Self-testing was noninferior with respect to all markers of HIV risk. Men in the self-testing arm reported significantly fewer STI tests during follow-up (mean = 2.3, 95% confidence interval = 1.9 to 2.7) than men in the control arm (3.2, 2.8 to 3.6; P = 0.0038).

CONCLUSIONS

Access to free HIV self-testing increased testing frequency among high-risk men who have sex with men and did not impact sexual behavior or STI acquisition.

Acceptability of HIV self-sampling kits (TINY vial) among people of black African ethnicity in the UK: a qualitative study

Background

Increasing routine HIV testing among key populations is a public health imperative, so improving access to acceptable testing options for those in need is a priority. Despite increasing targeted distribution and uptake of HIV self-sampling kits (SSKs) among men who have sex with men in the UK, little is known about why targeted SSK interventions for black African users are not as wide-spread or well-used. This paper addresses this key gap, offering insight into why some groups may be less likely than others to adopt certain types of SSK interventions in particular contexts. These data were collected during the development phase of a larger study to explore the feasibility and acceptability of targeted distribution of SSKs to black African people.

Methods

We undertook 6 focus groups with members of the public who self-identified as black African (n = 48), 6 groups with specialists providing HIV and social services to black African people (n = 53), and interviews with HIV specialist consultants and policy-makers (n = 9). Framework analysis was undertaken, using inductive and deductive analysis to develop and check themes.

Results

We found three valuable components of targeted SSK interventions for this population: the use of settings and technologies that increase choice and autonomy; targeted offers of HIV testing that preserve privacy and do not exacerbate HIV stigma; and ensuring that the specific kit being used (in this case, the TINY vial) is perceived as simple and reliable.

Conclusions

This unique and rigorous research offers insights into participants’ views on SSK interventions, offering key considerations when targeting this population.. Given the plethora of HIV testing options, our work demonstrates that those commissioning and delivering SSK interventions will need to clarify (for users and providers) how each kit type and intervention design adds value. Most significantly, these findings demonstrate that without a strong locus of control over their own circumstances and personal information, black African people are less likely to feel that they can pursue an HIV test that is safe and secure. Thus, where profound social inequalities persist, so will inequalities in HIV testing uptake – by any means.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12889-018-5256-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Acceptability of HIV Testing Sites Among Rural and Urban African Americans Who Use Cocaine

African Americans (AAs) who use cocaine in the Southern region of the U.S. have a relatively high risk of HIV and need for HIV testing. Among this group, those residing in rural areas may have less favorable opinions about common HIV testing sites, which could inhibit HIV testing. We examined rural/urban variations in their acceptability of multiple HIV testing sites (private physician clinic, local health department, community health center, community HIV fair, hospital emergency department, blood plasma donation center, drug abuse treatment facility, and mobile van or community outreach worker). Results from partial proportional odds and logistic regression analyses indicate that rural AA who use cocaine have lower odds of viewing local health departments (OR = 0.09, 95 % CI = 0.03-0.21), physician offices (OR = 0.19, 95 % CI = 0.09-0.42), and drug use treatment centers (OR = 0.49; 95 % CI = 0.30-0.80) as acceptable relative to their urban counterparts. The findings have implications for further targeting HIV testing toward AAs who use of cocaine, particularly those residing in the rural South.

Feasibility of supervised self-testing using an oral fluid-based HIV rapid testing method: a cross-sectional, mixed method study among pregnant women in rural India

INTRODUCTION

HIV self-testing can increase coverage of essential HIV services. This study aimed to establish the acceptability, concordance and feasibility of supervised HIV self-testing among pregnant women in rural India.

METHODS

A cross-sectional, mixed methods study was conducted among 202 consenting pregnant women in a rural Indian hospital between August 2014 and January 2015. Participants were provided with instructions on how to self-test using OraQuick(®) HIV antibody test, and subsequently asked to self-test under supervision of a community health worker. Test results were confirmed at a government-run integrated counselling and testing centre. A questionnaire was used to obtain information on patient demographics and the ease, acceptability and difficulties of self-testing. In-depth interviews were conducted with a sub-sample of 35 participants to understand their experiences.

RESULTS

In total, 202 participants performed the non-invasive, oral fluid-based, rapid test under supervision for HIV screening. Acceptance rate was 100%. Motivators for self-testing included: ease of testing (43.4%), quick results (27.3%) and non-invasive procedure (23.2%). Sensitivity and specificity were 100% for 201 tests, and one test was invalid. Concordance of test result interpretation between community health workers and participants was 98.5% with a Cohen's Kappa (k) value of k=0.566 with p<0.001 for inter-rater agreement. Although 92.6% participants reported that the instructions for the test were easy to understand, 18.7% required the assistance of a supervisor to self-test. Major themes that emerged from the qualitative interviews indicated the importance of the following factors in influencing acceptability of self-testing: clarity and accessibility of test instructions; time-efficiency and convenience of testing; non-invasiveness of the test; and fear of incorrect results. Overall, 96.5% of the participants recommended that the OraQuick(®) test kits should become publicly available.

CONCLUSIONS

Self-testing for HIV status using an oral fluid-based rapid test under the supervision of a community health worker was acceptable and feasible among pregnant women in rural India. Participants were supportive of making self-testing publicly available. Policy guidelines and implementation research are required to advance HIV self-testing for larger populations at scale.

Frequency of HIV testing among gay and bisexual men in the UK: implications for HIV prevention

Objectives

The aim of the study was to explore HIV testing frequency among UK men who have sex with men (MSM) in order to direct intervention development.

Methods

Cross‐sectional surveys were completed by 2409 MSM in Edinburgh, Glasgow and London in 2011 and a Scotland‐wide online survey was carried out in 2012/13. The frequency of HIV testing in the last 2 years was measured.

Results

Overall, 21.2% of respondents reported at least four HIV tests and 33.7% reported two or three tests in the last 2 years, so we estimate that 54.9% test annually. Men reporting at least four HIV tests were younger and less likely to be surveyed in London. They were more likely to report higher numbers of sexual and anal intercourse partners, but not “higher risk” unprotected anal intercourse (UAI) with at least two partners, casual partners and/or unknown/discordant status partners in the previous 12 months. Only 26.7% (238 of 893) of men reporting higher risk UAI reported at least four tests. Among all testers (n = 2009), 56.7% tested as part of a regular sexual health check and 35.5% tested following a risk event. Differences were observed between surveys, and those testing in response to a risk event were more likely to report higher risk UAI.

Conclusions

Guidelines recommend that all MSM test annually and those at “higher risk” test more frequently, but our findings suggest neither recommendation is being met. Additional efforts are required to increase testing frequency and harness the opportunities provided by biomedical HIV prevention. Regional, demographic and behavioural differences and variations in the risk profiles of testers suggest that it is unlikely that a “one size fits all” approach to increasing the frequency of testing will be successful.

Attitudes and Acceptability on HIV Self-testing Among Key Populations: A Literature Review

HIV self-testing (HIVST) is a potential strategy to overcome disparities in access to and uptake of HIV testing, particularly among key populations (KP). A literature review was conducted on the acceptability, values and preferences among KP. Data was analyzed by country income World Bank classification, type of specimen collection, level of support offered and other qualitative aspects. Most studies identified were from high-income countries and among men who have sex with men (MSM) who found HIVST to be acceptable. In general, MSM were interested in HIVST because of its convenient and private nature. However, they had concerns about the lack of counseling, possible user error and accuracy. Data on the values and preferences of other KP groups regarding HIVST is limited. This should be a research priority, as HIVST is likely to become more widely available, including in resource-limited settings.

Active recall to increase HIV and STI testing: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Active recall can improve reattendance rates and could increase retesting rates and detection of HIV and sexually transmitted infections (STIs), but the best strategy remains uncertain.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of active recall for HIV and/or STI testing. We searched six electronic databases using terms for HIV, STIs, tests and active recall (defined as a reminder to retest for HIV/STIs) for randomised, non-randomised and observational English-language studies published between 1983 and 2013. Outcomes included reattendance/retesting rate and STI diagnosis at follow-up.

RESULTS

Of 5634 papers identified, 17 met the inclusion criteria. Of the 14 comparative studies, all but one demonstrated higher reattendance/retesting rates in the intervention group, but the range was wide (17.5-89%). Meta-analysis of nine RCTs found reattendance/retesting rates were significantly higher in the intervention versus control groups (pooled OR 2.42 (95% CI 1.84 to 3.19)). In a subgroup analysis, home sampling increased retesting compared with clinic testing (pooled OR 2.20 (95% CI 1.65 to 2.94)). In observational studies SMS reminders increased retesting compared with standard clinic care (pooled OR 2.19 (95% CI 1.46 to 3.29)), but study estimates were highly heterogeneous (I(2)=94%, p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Active recall interventions are associated with higher reattendance/retesting rates for HIV/STI. Although home sampling and SMS reminders were associated with higher reattendance/retesting rates in most studies, evidence is limited by the heterogeneity of interventions and control groups and the quality of studies. Further work is needed to explore which active recall modality is clinically cost-effective and acceptable for HIV/STI screening.

Approval and potential use of over-the-counter HIV self-tests: the opinion of participants in a street based HIV rapid testing program in Spain

HIV self-testing, not yet available in Spain, is a strategy thought to be able to increase the number of people tested and testing frequency. 3,373 attenders of a street-based HIV rapid-testing program gave their opinion on authorizing over-the-counter self-tests and a potentially shorter lead time if self-tests were available. 88.0 % of participants were in favor of authorization, 9.2 % had no clear opinion and 2.8 % were against. 54.6 % of men who have sex with men (MSM), 38.4 % of men who have sex with women and 36.3 % of women acknowledged a potential for lead time reduction. Potential lead time was associated with being ≥35 years, having a university degree, never injected drugs, previous HIV tests and being concerned about an HIV positive result, and in MSM, also having ≥5 partners. Self-testing seems a promising strategy for Spain: its authorization is supported by nearly all potential users and almost three quarters of MSM would have opted to advance their current testing if self-tests were available.

A review of Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) rapid testing

BACKGROUND

In Canada, it is estimated that 71,300 persons were living with HIV at the end of 2011. Approximately 25% (14,500 to 21,500) of prevalent cases were unaware of their HIV infection. Expanded use of HIV rapid tests may increase the detection of undiagnosed infections, enable earlier treatment and support services and prevent the onward transmission of HIV.

OBJECTIVE

To examine patient acceptability, impact (defined as receipt of test results and linkage to care) and cost-effectiveness of HIV rapid tests.

METHODS

A search was conducted for systematic reviews on HIV rapid testing, with studies from both developed and developing countries, published in English and between 2000 and 2013. The Assessment of Multiple Systematic Review (AMSTAR) tool was used to assess the included systematic reviews for methodological quality. Results were summarized narratively for each of the outcomes.

RESULTS

Eight systematic reviews were included. Acceptability of HIV rapid tests was generally high in medical settings (69% to 98%) especially among pregnant women and youth attending emergency rooms but was lower in non-medical settings (14% to 46%). The percentage of people who obtained their test results was variable. It was high (83% to 93%) in emergency rooms but was low in a rapid care setting with regular business hours (27%). Impact on linkage to care was limited. Only one systematic review examined cost-effectiveness of rapid testing and concluded that HIV rapid tests were cost-effective in comparison to traditional methods; however, results were all based on static models.

CONCLUSION

Overall, HIV rapid tests demonstrated generally high acceptability, variability in receiving test results and limited impact on linkage to care. While these findings suggest that HIV rapid tests may be useful, further research is needed to confirm in whom, when and where they are best used and how to ensure better linkage to care.

Acceptability and intended usage preferences for six HIV testing options among internet-using men who have sex with men

Background

Men who have sex with men (MSM) continue to be disproportionately impacted by the Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) epidemic in the United States (US). Testing for HIV is the cornerstone of comprehensive prevention efforts and the gateway to early engagement of infected individuals in medical care. We sought to determine attitudes towards six different HIV testing modalities presented collectively to internet-using MSM and identify which options rank higher than others in terms of intended usage preference.

Methods

Between October and November 2012, we surveyed 973 HIV-negative or -unknown status MSM and assessed their acceptability of each of the following services hypothetically offered free of charge: Testing at a physician’s office; Individual voluntary counseling and testing (VCT); Couples’ HIV counseling and testing (CHCT); Expedited/express testing; Rapid home self-testing using an oral fluid test; Home dried blood spot (DBS) specimen self-collection for laboratory testing. Kruskal-Wallis tests were used to determine whether the stated likelihood of using each of these modalities differed by selected respondent characteristics. Men were also asked to rank these options in order of intended usage preference, and consensual rankings were determined using the modified Borda count (MBC) method.

Results

Most participants reported being extremely likely or somewhat likely to use all HIV testing modalities except DBS self-collection for laboratory testing. Younger MSM indicated greater acceptability for expedited/express testing (P < 0.001), and MSM with lower educational levels reported being more likely to use CHCT (P < 0.001). Non-Hispanic black MSM indicated lower acceptability for VCT (P < 0.001). Rapid home self-testing using an oral fluid test and testing at a physician’s office were the two most preferred options across all demographic and behavioral strata.

Conclusions

Novel approaches to increase the frequency of HIV testing among US MSM are urgently needed. Combination testing packages could enable high risk MSM in putting together annual testing strategies personalized to their circumstances, and warrant due consideration as an element of combination HIV prevention packages.

Preferred HIV testing services and programme characteristics among clients of a rapid HIV testing programme

BACKGROUND

In the current context of diversity and coexistence of HIV testing approaches, limited information exists on test recipient's views of HIV testing services and programme attributes that could ease the testing process and make it more appealing for at risk individuals who don't know their HIV status. This study analyzed ratings given to different testing sites and programme characteristics that might facilitate testing.

METHODS

We analyzed data from 3120 persons attending a mobile HIV testing programme located on a central street in the gay district of Madrid.

RESULTS

64% were men (of which, 55% had had sex with other men), 59.5% were <30 years, 35.4% foreigners, 50.6% had a university degree,71.7% a regular employment, 59.3% reported multiple partners and inconsistent condom use and 56.5% had been tested for HIV. Non Governmental Organizations and specific HIV/STI centres received the maximum rating from over 60% of participants, followed by self-testing (38.9%). Pharmacies (20.8%) and hospital emergency departments (14.2%) were the worst valued testing sites. Over 80% gave the highest rating to having immediate test results, not needing a previous appointment, and free testing, while less than 50% gave the maximum rating to privacy and anonymity.

CONCLUSIONS

HIV testing services that don't require an appointment, based on free tests with rapid results are most valued by a young, not socially marginalized but high risk sexual exposure population. On the contrary, issues traditionally highly valued by health care providers or AIDS social organizations (privacy and anonymity) are much less valued.

Acceptability of HIV self-testing: a systematic literature review

Background

The uptake of HIV testing and counselling services remains low in risk groups around the world. Fear of stigmatisation, discrimination and breach of confidentiality results in low service usage among risk groups. HIV self-testing (HST) is a confidential HIV testing option that enables people to find out their status in the privacy of their homes. We evaluated the acceptability of HST and the benefits and challenges linked to the introduction of HST.

Methods

A literature review was conducted on the acceptability of HST in projects in which HST was offered to study participants. Besides acceptability rates of HST, accuracy rates of self-testing, referral rates of HIV-positive individuals into medical care, disclosure rates and rates of first-time testers were assessed. In addition, the utilisation rate of a telephone hotline for counselling issues and clients` attitudes towards HST were extracted.

Results

Eleven studies met the inclusion criteria (HST had been offered effectively to study participants and had been administered by participants themselves) and demonstrated universally high acceptability of HST among study populations. Studies included populations from resource poor settings (Kenya and Malawi) and from high-income countries (USA, Spain and Singapore). The majority of study participants were able to perform HST accurately with no or little support from trained staff. Participants appreciated the confidentiality and privacy but felt that the provision of adequate counselling services was inadequate.

Conclusions

The review demonstrates that HST is an acceptable testing alternative for risk groups and can be performed accurately by the majority of self-testers. Clients especially value the privacy and confidentiality of HST. Linkage to counselling as well as to treatment and care services remain major challenges.

A review of self-testing for HIV: research and policy priorities in a new era of HIV prevention

Global progress toward universal human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) testing remains slow. Interest in HIV self-testing is high and may increase knowledge of HIV status; however, empirical research on selftesting is limited, resulting in lack of evidence on which to base policy recommendations.

Inadequate uptake of testing for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) remains a primary bottleneck toward universal access to treatment and care, and is an obstacle to realizing the potential of new interventions for preventing HIV infection, including treatment for prevention and preexposure prophylaxis. HIV self-testing offers an approach to scaling up testing that could be high impact, low cost, confidential, and empowering for users. Although HIV self-testing was first considered >20 years ago, it has not been widely implemented. We conducted a review of policy and research on HIV self-testing, which indicates that policy is shifting toward a more flexible approach with less emphasis on pretest counseling and that HIV self-testing has been adopted in a number of settings. Empirical research on self-testing is limited, resulting in a lack of an evidence base upon which to base policy recommendations. Relevant research and investment in programs are urgently needed to enable consideration of developing formalized self-testing programs.

Supervised and unsupervised self-testing for HIV in high- and low-risk populations: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Stigma, discrimination, lack of privacy, and long waiting times partly explain why six out of ten individuals living with HIV do not access facility-based testing. By circumventing these barriers, self-testing offers potential for more people to know their sero-status. Recent approval of an in-home HIV self test in the US has sparked self-testing initiatives, yet data on acceptability, feasibility, and linkages to care are limited. We systematically reviewed evidence on supervised (self-testing and counselling aided by a health care professional) and unsupervised (performed by self-tester with access to phone/internet counselling) self-testing strategies.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

Seven databases (Medline [via PubMed], Biosis, PsycINFO, Cinahl, African Medicus, LILACS, and EMBASE) and conference abstracts of six major HIV/sexually transmitted infections conferences were searched from 1st January 2000-30th October 2012. 1,221 citations were identified and 21 studies included for review. Seven studies evaluated an unsupervised strategy and 14 evaluated a supervised strategy. For both strategies, data on acceptability (range: 74%-96%), preference (range: 61%-91%), and partner self-testing (range: 80%-97%) were high. A high specificity (range: 99.8%-100%) was observed for both strategies, while a lower sensitivity was reported in the unsupervised (range: 92.9%-100%; one study) versus supervised (range: 97.4%-97.9%; three studies) strategy. Regarding feasibility of linkage to counselling and care, 96% (n = 102/106) of individuals testing positive for HIV stated they would seek post-test counselling (unsupervised strategy, one study). No extreme adverse events were noted. The majority of data (n = 11,019/12,402 individuals, 89%) were from high-income settings and 71% (n = 15/21) of studies were cross-sectional in design, thus limiting our analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Both supervised and unsupervised testing strategies were highly acceptable, preferred, and more likely to result in partner self-testing. However, no studies evaluated post-test linkage with counselling and treatment outcomes and reporting quality was poor. Thus, controlled trials of high quality from diverse settings are warranted to confirm and extend these findings. Please see later in the article for the Editors' Summary.

Accuracy and user-acceptability of HIV self-testing using an oral fluid-based HIV rapid test

BACKGROUND

The United States FDA approved an over-the-counter HIV self-test, to facilitate increased HIV testing and earlier linkage to care. We assessed the accuracy of self-testing by untrained participants compared to healthcare worker (HCW) testing, participants' ability to interpret sample results and user-acceptability of self-tests in Singapore.

METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

A cross-sectional study, involving 200 known HIV-positive patients and 794 unknown HIV status at-risk participants was conducted. Participants (all without prior self-test experience) performed self-testing guided solely by visual instructions, followed by HCW testing, both using the OraQuick ADVANCE Rapid HIV 1/2 Antibody Test, with both results interpreted by the HCW. To assess ability to interpret results, participants were provided 3 sample results (positive, negative, and invalid) to interpret. Of 192 participants who tested positive on HCW testing, self-testing was positive in 186 (96.9%), negative in 5 (2.6%), and invalid in 1 (0.5%). Of 794 participants who tested negative on HCW testing, self-testing was negative in 791 (99.6%), positive in 1 (0.1%), and invalid in 2 (0.3%). Excluding invalid tests, self-testing had sensitivity of 97.4% (95% CI 95.1% to 99.7%) and specificity of 99.9% (95% CI: 99.6% to 100%). When interpreting results, 96%, 93.1% and 95.2% correctly read the positive, negative and invalid respectively. There were no significant demographic predictors for false negative self-testing or wrongly interpreting positive or invalid sample results as negative. Eighty-seven percent would purchase the kit over-the-counter; 89% preferred to take HIV tests in private. 72.5% and 74.9% felt the need for pre- and post-test counseling respectively. Only 28% would pay at least USD15 for the test.

CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE

Self-testing was associated with high specificity, and a small but significant number of false negatives. Incorrectly identifying model results as invalid was a major reason for incorrect result interpretation. Survey responses were supportive of making self-testing available.

Motivation and experiences of self-testers regarding tests for cardiovascular risk factors

BACKGROUND

In recent years, self-tests have become increasingly available to the general public, though their value is still being debated. Because these tests are available, consumers should have access to clear information about self-testing. Examining experiences of self-testers could contribute to the development of consumer information.

OBJECTIVE

Detailed exploration of consumers' experiences with self-testing for cardiovascular risk factors.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews with 20 consumers who had performed a self-test for glucose, cholesterol or albuminuria. The main topics of the interviews were reasons for self-testing, performing the self-test, follow-up behaviour and perceived need for information on self-testing. Data were analysed using thematic content analysis.

RESULTS

Regarding the reason for self-testing, three types of users were distinguished: those who engaged in self-testing when a test was offered, either with or without previous knowledge about the disease or risk factor, and those who had actively decided to test and had searched for a self-test themselves. Self-testers had generally experienced no problems performing the test or interpreting the result and had considerable confidence in the result. They were easily reassured by a normal result, while an abnormal result did not automatically mean they consulted a doctor. Most participants did not feel the need for more information.

CONCLUSIONS

Self-testers often perform tests for reassurance, without considering the disadvantages, such as the absence of professional counselling and the risk of false-positive or false-negative results. Consumer information should promote more informed and deliberate choices for self-testing.

How do people respond to self-test results? A cross-sectional survey

Background

Self-tests, tests on medical conditions that can be performed by consumers without consulting a doctor first, are frequently used. Nevertheless, there are concerns about the safety of self-testing, as it may delay diagnosis and appropriate treatment in the case of inappropriate use of the test, or false-negative results. It is unclear whether self-tests stimulate appropriate follow-up behaviour. Our aim was to examine the frequency of self-test use, consumers' response to self-test results in terms of their confidence in the result, reassurance by the test result, and follow-up behaviour.

Methods

A two step cross-sectional survey was designed. A random sample of 6700 Internet users in an existing Internet panel received an online questionnaire on the use of self-tests. Self-tests were defined as tests on body materials, initiated by consumers with the aim to diagnose a disease or risk factor. A second questionnaire on consumers' response to self-test results was sent to the respondents that were identified as a self-tester in the first questionnaire (n = 703).

Results

18.1% (799/4416) of the respondents had ever performed a self-test, the most frequently used tests being those for diabetes (5.3%), kidney disease (4.9%), cholesterol (4.5%), urinary tract infection (1.9%) and HIV/AIDS and Chlamydia (both 1.6%). A total of 78.1% of the testers with a normal test result and 81.4% of those with an abnormal result reported confidence in this result. Almost all (95.6%) of the testers with a normal result felt reassured. After a normal result, 78.1% did not take any further action and 5.8% consulted a doctor. The corresponding figures after an abnormal test result were 9.3% and 72.2%, respectively.

Conclusions

Respondents who had performed a self-test seemed to base their follow-up behaviour on the result of the test. They had confidence in the test result, and were often reassured by a normal result. After an abnormal result, most self-testers sought medical care. Because consumers seem to trust the self-test results, further research should focus on the development of consumer information addressing indications for performing a self-test, the validity of self-tests and appropriate interpretation of and management after a test.

Improving behaviour in self-testing (IBIS): Study on frequency of use, consequences, information needs and use, and quality of currently available consumer information (protocol)

BACKGROUND

Self-tests are available to consumers for more than 25 conditions, ranging from infectious diseases to cardiovascular risk factors. Self-tests are defined as in-vitro tests on body materials such as blood, urine, faeces, or saliva that are initiated by consumers to diagnose a particular disorder or risk factor without involving a medical professional. In 2006, 16% of a sample of Dutch Internet users had ever used at least one self-test and 17% intended to use a self-test in the future. The objectives of this study are to determine (1) the frequency of self-test use, (2) the consumers' reasons for using or not using a self-test, (3) the information that is used by self-testers in the different self-test stages and the consumers' interpretation of the quality of this information, (4) the consumers' response to self-test results in terms of their confidence in the result, reassurance by the test result, and follow-up behaviour, (5) the information consumers report to need in the decision making process of using or not using a self-test, and in further management on the basis of the self-test result, and (6) the quality of the currently available consumer information on a selected set of self-tests.

METHODS

Mixed methods study with (1) a cross-sectional study consisting of a two-phase Internet-questionnaire, (2) semi-structured interviews with self-testers and consumers who intend to use a self-test, and (3) the assessment of the quality of consumer information of self-tests. The Health Belief Model and the Theory of Planned Behaviour will serve as the theoretical basis for the questionnaires and the interview topic guides.

CONCLUSIONS

The self-testing area is still in a state of flux and therefore it is expected that self-test use will increase in the future. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study which combines quantitative and qualitative research to identify consumers' information needs and use concerning self-testing, and the consumers' actual follow-up behaviour based on the self-test result, and simultaneously investigates the quality of the currently available consumer information. The results of this study will be used as an input in developing consumer information on self-testing.

Implications and impact of the new US Centers for Disease Control and prevention HIV testing guidelines

Of the 1.2 million Americans estimated to be living with HIV in the United States, approximately 250,000 are unaware of their diagnosis and therefore unable to access clinical care and life-sustaining treatment. The revised 2006 US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's guidelines for HIV testing recommend universal, routine, and voluntary HIV screening in public and private health care settings for all adults and adolescents between 13 and 64 years old. These major revisions present new challenges for health care providers, hospitals, government agencies, and community advocacy groups. In this review, we discuss the important issues in diverse care venues such as opt-out testing, consent and confidentiality, barriers to treatment, and financial impact. The implications of the revised recommendations for HIV testing are addressed in the context of a fragmented, overstressed, underfunded US health care system.

Client satisfaction with rapid HIV testing: comparison between an urban sexually transmitted disease clinic and a community-based testing center

Rapid HIV testing allows same-day results, increasing the number of persons who learn their HIV status. Understanding how clients in different settings perceive rapid testing may increase acceptance of this technology. From June 1999 to August 2001 we interviewed 256 clients at a publicly funded urban sexually transmitted disease (STD) clinic and 1201 clients at a community- based HIV counseling, testing, and referral center (Los Angeles Gay and Lesbian Center; LAGLC) about their posttest satisfaction with rapid HIV testing. HIV prevalence was 3.9% at the STD clinic and 5.3% at the LAGLC. In multivariate analysis, adjusting for age, sexual orientation, race/ethnicity, history of STDs, self-perceived HIV risk, prior HIV test and HIV testing results, clients at the STD clinics (versus LAGLC) were more likely to find testing stressful (adjusted odds ratio [AOR]: 1.75, 95% confidence limits [CL]: 1.27, 2.42) and feel that they received their results too quickly (AOR: 2.05, 95% CL: 1.39, 3.03). Latinos (versus whites) were more likely to report that they received their results too quickly (AOR: 4.99, 95% CL: 3.48, 7.14) and that it would be better to wait a week for HIV test results (AOR: 2.48, 95% CL: 1.51, 4.09). Further research may elucidate the reasons why some groups prefer to wait for results, and enable policymakers to better design strategies to reach high-risk groups with rapid HIV testing.

Overcoming barriers to HIV testing: preferences for new strategies among clients of a needle exchange, a sexually transmitted disease clinic, and sex venues for men who have sex with men

OBJECTIVE

To determine strategies to overcome barriers to HIV testing among persons at risk.

METHODS

We developed a survey that elicited testing motivators, barriers, and preferences for new strategies among 460 participants at a needle exchange, three sex venues for men who have sex with men, and a sexually transmitted disease clinic.

RESULTS

Barriers to testing included factors influenced by individual concern (fear and discrimination); by programs, policies, and laws (named reporting and inability to afford treatment); and by counseling and testing strategies (dislike of counseling, anxiety waiting for results, and venipuncture). The largest proportions of participants preferred rapid testing strategies, including clinic-based testing (27%) and home self-testing (20%); roughly equal proportions preferred oral fluid testing (18%), urine testing (17%), and standard blood testing (17%). One percent preferred home specimen collection. Participants who had never tested before were significantly more likely to prefer home self-testing compared with other strategies. Blacks were significantly more likely to prefer urine testing.

CONCLUSIONS

Strategies for improving acceptance of HIV counseling and testing include information about access to anonymous testing and early treatment. Expanding options for rapid testing, urine testing, and home self-testing; providing alternatives to venipuncture; making pretest counseling optional; and allowing telephone results disclosure may encourage more persons to learn their HIV status.

Measuring what people value: a comparison of "attitude" and "preference" surveys

OBJECTIVE

To compare and contrast methods and findings from two approaches to valuation used in the same survey: measurement of "attitudes" using simple rankings and ratings versus measurement of "preferences" using conjoint analysis. Conjoint analysis, a stated preference method, involves comparing scenarios composed of attribute descriptions by ranking, rating, or choosing scenarios. We explore possible explanations for our findings using focus groups conducted after the quantitative survey.

METHODS

A self-administered survey, measuring attitudes and preferences for HIV tests, was conducted at HIV testing sites in San Francisco in 1999-2000 (n = 365, response rate = 96 percent). Attitudes were measured and analyzed using standard approaches. Conjoint analysis scenarios were developed using a fractional factorial design and results analyzed using random effects probit models. We examined how the results using the two approaches were both similar and different.

RESULTS

We found that "attitudes" and "preferences" were generally consistent, but there were some important differences. Although rankings based on the attitude and conjoint analysis surveys were similar, closer examination revealed important differences in how respondents valued price and attributes with "halo" effects, variation in how attribute levels were valued, and apparent differences in decision-making processes.

CONCLUSIONS

To our knowledge, this is the first study to compare attitude surveys and conjoint analysis surveys and to explore the meaning of the results using post-hoc focus groups. Although the overall findings for attitudes and preferences were similar, the two approaches resulted in some different conclusions. Health researchers should consider the advantages and limitations of both methods when determining how to measure what people value.

Measuring what people value: a comparison of "attitude" and "preference" surveys

OBJECTIVE

To compare and contrast methods and findings from two approaches to valuation used in the same survey: measurement of "attitudes" using simple rankings and ratings versus measurement of "preferences" using conjoint analysis. Conjoint analysis, a stated preference method, involves comparing scenarios composed of attribute descriptions by ranking, rating, or choosing scenarios. We explore possible explanations for our findings using focus groups conducted after the quantitative survey.

METHODS

A self-administered survey, measuring attitudes and preferences for HIV tests, was conducted at HIV testing sites in San Francisco in 1999-2000 (n = 365, response rate = 96 percent). Attitudes were measured and analyzed using standard approaches. Conjoint analysis scenarios were developed using a fractional factorial design and results analyzed using random effects probit models. We examined how the results using the two approaches were both similar and different.

RESULTS

We found that "attitudes" and "preferences" were generally consistent, but there were some important differences. Although rankings based on the attitude and conjoint analysis surveys were similar, closer examination revealed important differences in how respondents valued price and attributes with "halo" effects, variation in how attribute levels were valued, and apparent differences in decision-making processes.

CONCLUSIONS

To our knowledge, this is the first study to compare attitude surveys and conjoint analysis surveys and to explore the meaning of the results using post-hoc focus groups. Although the overall findings for attitudes and preferences were similar, the two approaches resulted in some different conclusions. Health researchers should consider the advantages and limitations of both methods when determining how to measure what people value.

Measuring preferences for health care interventions using conjoint analysis: an application to HIV testing

OBJECTIVE

To examine preferences for HIV test methods using conjoint analysis, a method used to measure economic preferences (utilities).

DATA SOURCES

Self-administered surveys at four publicly funded HIV testing locations in San Francisco, California, between November 1999 and February 2000 (n = 365, 96 percent response rate).

STUDY DESIGN

We defined six important attributes of HIV tests and their levels (location, price, ease of collection, timeliness/accuracy, privacy/anonymity, and counseling). A fractional factorial design was used to develop scenarios that consisted of combinations of attribute levels. Respondents were asked 11 questions about whether they would choose "Test A or B" based on these scenarios.

DATA ANALYSIS

We used random effects probit models to estimate utilities for testing attributes. Since price was included as an attribute, we were able to estimate willingness to pay, which provides a standardized measure for use in economic evaluations. We used extensive analyses to examine the reliability and validity of the results, including analyses of: (1) preference consistency, (2) willingness to trade among attributes, and (3) consistency with theoretical predictions.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

Respondents most preferred tests that were accurate/timely and private/anonymous, whereas they had relatively lower preferences for in-person counseling. Respondents were willing to pay an additional $35 for immediate, highly accurate results; however, they had a strong disutility for receiving immediate but less accurate results. By using conjoint analysis to analyze new combinations of attributes, we found that respondents would most prefer instant, highly accurate home tests, even though they are not currently available in the U.S. Respondents were willing to pay $39 for a highly accurate, instant home test.

CONCLUSIONS

The method of conjoint analysis enabled us to estimate utilities for specific attributes of HIV tests as well as the overall utility obtained from various HIV tests, including tests that are under consideration but not yet available. Conjoint analysis offers an approach that can be useful for measuring and understanding the value of other health care goods, services, and interventions.