Monitoring Recently Acquired HIV Infections in Amsterdam, The Netherlands: The Attribution of Test Locations

Background: Surveillance of recent HIV infections (RHI) using an avidity assay has been implemented at Dutch sexual health centres (SHC) since 2014, but data on RHI diagnosed at other test locations is lacking.Setting: Implementation of the avidity assay in HIV treatment clinics for the purpose of studying RHI among HIV patients tested at different test locations.Methods: We retrospectively tested leftover specimens from newly diagnosed HIV patients in care in 2013–2015 in Amsterdam. Avidity Index (AI) values ≤0.80 indicated recent infection (acquired ≤6 months prior to diagnosis), and AI > 0.80 indicated established infection (acquired >6 months prior to diagnosis). An algorithm for RHI was applied to correct for false recency. Recency based on this algorithm was compared with recency based on epidemiological data only. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to identify factors associated with RHI among men who have sex with men (MSM).Results: We tested 447 specimens with avidity; 72% from MSM. Proportions of RHI were 20% among MSM and 10% among heterosexuals. SHC showed highest proportions of RHI (27%), followed by GPs (15%), hospitals (5%), and other/unknown locations (11%) (p < 0.001). Test location was the only factor associated with RHI among MSM. A higher proportion of RHI was found based on epidemiological data compared to avidity testing combined with the RHI algorithm.Conclusion: SHC identify more RHI infections compared to other test locations, as they serve high-risk populations and offer frequent HIV testing. Using avidity-testing for surveillance purposes may help targeting prevention programs, but the assay lacks robustness and its added value may decline with improved, repeat HIV testing and data collection.

Survival Analysis of Time to Retest for HIV Among Men Who Have Sex with Men from Metro Manila, Philippines: A Single-Center Prospective Study

Background: Regular HIV testing means early detection of the virus and prompt access to treatment. However, factors affecting retesting following receipt of a non-reactive test result are not yet well understood. This study aims to determine the predictors of time to repeat HIV testing among men who have sex with men (MSM) from Metro Manila, Philippines within six months following receipt of a non-reactive test result. Methods: A prospective study was implemented at a community-based HIV testing and counseling center. A total of 250 non-reactive MSM from Metro Manila and with a recent risk of acquiring HIV were the respondents. At baseline, data on socio-demographic factors were gathered; while at follow-up, repeat test status of each participant within six months after baseline was collected. Results: Two retests per 1,000 person-weeks were recorded. Mean survival time was 23.93 weeks, 95% CI: [23.18 - 24.68]. Cox proportional hazards regression demonstrated that statistically significant factors of time to retest were age (HR = 0.90, 95% CI [0.85, 0.96]) and number of tests in lifetime (HR = 1.12, 95%CI [1.06, 1.18]). Conclusion: Although the average time to return is within the recommended period of three to six months, the low return rate suggests the call for encouraging repeat HIV testing among MSM with non-reactive results and recent risk of acquiring HIV. Repeat testing has been shown to be facilitated by age and previous testing history. HIV/AIDS counselors and program administrators can aim for MSM who are older and with relatively low testing history to help meet the global target of ending the HIV/AIDS global epidemic.

A Continuous Quality Improvement Intervention to Improve Antenatal HIV Care Testing in Rural South Africa: Evaluation of Implementation in a Real-World Setting

Background: We evaluated continuous quality improvement (CQI) targeting antenatal HIV care quality in rural South Africa using a stepped-wedge cluster-randomised controlled trial (Management and Optimisation of Nutrition, Antenatal, Reproductive, Child health, MONARCH) and an embedded process evaluation. Here, we present results of the process evaluation examining determinants of CQI practice and ‘normalisation.’ Methods: A team of CQI mentors supported public-sector health workers in seven primary care clinics to (1) identify root causes of poor HIV viral load (VL) monitoring among pregnant women living with HIV and repeat HIV testing among pregnant women not living with HIV, and (2) design and iteratively test their own solutions. We used a mixed methods evaluation with field notes from CQI mentors (‘dose’ and ‘reach’ of CQI, causes of poor HIV care testing rates, implemented change ideas); patient medical records (HIV care testing by clinic and time step); and semi-structured interviews with available health workers. We analysed field notes andsemi-structured interviews for determinants of CQI implementation and ‘normalisation’ using Normalisation Process Theory (NPT) and Tailored Implementation of Chronic Diseases (TICD) frameworks. Results: All interviewed health workers found the CQI mentors and methodology helpful for quality improvement. Total administered ‘dose’ was higher than planned but ‘reach’ was limited by resource constraints, particularly staffing shortages. Simple workable improvements to identified root causes were implemented, such as a patient tracking notebook and results filing system. VL monitoring improved over time, but not repeat HIV testing. Besides resource constraints, gaps in knowledge of guidelines, lack of leadership, poor clinical documentation, and data quality gaps reduced CQI implementation fidelity and normalisation. Conclusion: While CQI holds promise, we identified several health system challenges. Priorities for policy makers include improving staffing and strategies to improve clinical documentation. Additional support with implementing clinical guidelines and improving routine data quality are needed. Normalising CQI may be challenging without concurrent health system improvements.

“[Repeat] testing and counseling is one of the key [services] that the government should continue providing”: participants’ perceptions on extended repeat HIV testing and enhanced counseling (ERHTEC) for primary HIV prevention in pregnant and lactating women in the PRIMAL study, Uganda

Background The ‘Primary HIV Prevention among Pregnant and Lactating Ugandan Women’ (PRIMAL) randomized controlled trial aimed to assess an enhanced counseling strategy linked to extended postpartum repeat HIV testing and enhanced counseling among 820 HIV-negative pregnant and lactating women aged 18–49 years and 410 of their male partners to address the first pillar of the WHO Global Strategy for the Prevention of Mother-to-Child HIV transmission (PMTCT). This paper presents findings of qualitative studies aimed at evaluating participants’ and service providers’ perceptions on the acceptability and feasibility of the intervention and at understanding the effects of the intervention on risk reduction, couple communication, and emotional support from women’s partners. Methods PRIMAL Study participants were enrolled from two antenatal care clinics and randomized 1:1 to an intervention or control arm. Both arms received repeat sexually transmitted infections (STI) and HIV testing at enrolment, labor and delivery, and at 3, 6, 12, 18 and 24 months postpartum. The intervention consisted of enhanced quarterly counseling on HIV risk reduction, couple communication, family planning and nutrition delivered by study counselors through up to 24 months post-partum. Control participants received repeat standard post-test counseling. Qualitative data were collected from intervention women participants, counsellors and midwives at baseline, midline and end of the study through 18 focus group discussions and 44 key informant interviews. Data analysis followed a thematic approach using framework analysis and a matrix-based system for organizing, reducing, and synthesizing data. Results At baseline, FGD participants mentioned multiple sexual partners and lack of condom use as the main risks for pregnant and lactating women to acquire HIV. The main reasons for having multiple sexual partners were 1) the cultural practice not to have sex in the late pre-natal and early post-natal period; 2) increased sexual desire during pregnancy; 3) alcohol abuse; 4) poverty; and 5) conflict in couples. Consistent condom use at baseline was limited due to lack of knowledge and low acceptance of condom use in couples. The majority of intervention participants enrolled as couples felt enhanced counselling improved understanding, faithfulness, mutual support and appreciation within their couple. Another benefit mentioned by participants was improvement of couple communication and negotiation, as well as daily decision-making around sexual needs, family planning and condom use. Participants stressed the importance of providing counselling services to all couples. Conclusion This study shows that enhanced individual and couple counselling linked to extended repeat HIV and STI testing and focusing on HIV prevention, couple communication, family planning and nutrition is a feasible and acceptable intervention that could enhance risk reduction programs among pregnant and lactating women. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov registration number NCT01882998, date of registration 21st June 2013.