Search

Introduction: After a promising start in Australia, elimination efforts for hepatitis C are not on track. Following the global campaign to 'find the missing' in hepatitis C response, this qualitative study explores stakeholder perspectives on the 'missing' in the 'endgame' of hepatitis elimination in the state of New South Wales, Australia. Method: Twenty‐eight key informants working in New South Wales, elsewhere in Australia and internationally in high income countries participated in a semi‐structured qualitative interview. Analysis examined key informant accounts of the 'missing' in efforts to eliminate hepatitis C. Results: Participants' accounts framed the missing in relation to epidemiological knowledge, making‐up four population categories 'missing' or 'missed' in hepatitis C response. In turn, accounts situated the missing in relation to where and how individuals were presumed to connect, or not, with existing health‐care infrastructures. This gave rise to concerns about the capacity of health services to be made available for those at risk or in need, with systems said to create opportunities for people to 'miss out' on hepatitis C services. Discussion and Conclusions: The 'missing' in the 'endgame' of hepatitis C elimination effort is not simply a function of who—populations missed—but of where and how, that is, situation and context. Our findings encourage a focus on how services, systems and contexts may create situations in which people become missed or are 'made missing' from care. We therefore advocate for a systemic, and not only population‐based, approach in the final push towards hepatitis C's elimination. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Enumeration of disease is a key management tool. Setting of targets, like for hepatitis C elimination, have deep meaning and effect. We use the case of elimination in New South Wales (NSW), Australia to examine key informants' understandings of the use of targets, and the evidence that informs them, to drive action in elimination. Twenty‐eight key informants working in NSW, elsewhere in Australia and internationally in high‐income countries participated in a semi‐structured qualitative interview in 2022. Analysis was informed by scholarship calling for examination of the ways in which science constructs what is thought possible in action. Participants pointed to the power of quantified evidence and targets and their complex effects, and questioned the usefulness and certainty derived from these at the "pointy end" of elimination. Although a range of targets exist in global and local strategies, reaching testing targets was the assumed solution to achieving elimination. Achieving elimination was thought to require "off piste" and experimental approaches that went beyond available evidence. The different types of work that participants felt necessary for late‐stage elimination may require additional metrics to explain return on investment ratios. What threshold would be used to reduce efforts in elimination was a major concern. These data indicate that understandings of the evidence underpinning elimination targets and how to achieve them are far from settled. At this point, elimination efforts may need to rely on locally produced and community‐driven evidence and shift from evidence‐based to evidence‐making paradigm. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

COVID-19 vaccination is particularly challenging among populations who have experienced discrimination in healthcare settings. This paper presents qualitative findings from in-depth interviews about COVID-19 vaccination conducted in Australia between October 2020 and November 2021. Data from four different studies are presented; each population has unique experiences of discrimination within the healthcare system: Aboriginal people; people who inject drugs (PWID); people living with HIV (PLHIV); and gay and bisexual men (GBM). Analyses were guided by the behavioural and social determinants model that forms the basis of the World Health Organization's "data for action: achieving high uptake of COVID-19 vaccines" interim guidance. All populations viewed vaccination as necessary for community protection, although narratives of community care were most common among Aboriginal people. Concerns about vaccine safety were expressed by all participant groups, although participants living with HIV and GBM were more trusting of vaccines possibly because of their ongoing and usually positive past experiences with biomedical technologies for HIV management and sexual health. Aboriginal participants reported distrust of mainstream government and participants who inject drugs expressed a more generalised suspicion about COVID-19 and its origins. Practical problems related to transport, booking appointments for vaccination and so forth, were more common among participants living with HIV and GBM, possibly because these specific interviews were conducted throughout 2021 when vaccines were more available, whereas data for the other populations were collected before the vaccine rollout. Findings show that vaccine willingness is shaped by past experiences of discrimination in healthcare setting, but different histories of discrimination can differently impact vaccine willingness. Promotional messaging and delivery must take account of these important differences so to not treat these populations homogenously. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aims: Hepatitis C virus (HCV) is highly prevalent within the prison setting. Although HCV testing and treatment are available within prisons, system barriers can impede progress along the HCV care cascade for those who are incarcerated. The PIVOT intervention used a 'one‐stop‐shop' model (i.e. point‐of‐care HCV RNA testing, Fibroscan‐based liver disease assessment and treatment) at a reception prison in New South Wales, Australia. This analysis sought to understand the role of point‐of‐care HCV RNA testing at intake in reducing barriers to the HCV care cascade within the male prison setting. Design and Setting: Qualitative analysis using semi‐structured interviews in a reception prison in Australia. Participants: Twenty‐four men enrolled in the PIVOT study; all participants had undergone HCV point‐of‐care testing in the intervention arm. Measurements: Høj's Integrated Framework informed this analysis. Findings: Participants widely expressed the view that point‐of‐care HCV RNA testing on entry was beneficial for care engagement. Point‐of‐care testing was perceived as timely (compared with standard pathology) and reduced opportunities for adjudication by correctional officers due to fewer clinic visits for testing and results. Adoption of routine opt‐out testing at prison intake was regarded as an important strategy for normalising HCV testing (and likely to increase pathways to treatment uptake) and fostered patient candidacy (i.e. self‐perceived eligibility to access care). Conclusion: Twenty‐four men in prison in New South Wales, Australia, who underwent opt‐out point‐of‐care HCV RNA testing on entry into prison, widely supported the programme as a means of overcoming barriers to HCV testing and treatment in the prison setting, as well as providing public health benefits through early detection of HCV infection among people entering into custody. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

One of the key issues in the alcohol and other drug (AOD) treatment sector concerns the reported difficulties that clients have in accessing treatment. This paper draws on qualitative interview data collected from clients undergoing treatment (n = 20) and stakeholders (n = 15) of five specialist non‐government AOD treatment services in New South Wales, Australia, to offer an in‐depth perspective about treatment entry experiences. We identified four key themes of positive treatment entry experiences: the presence of high‐quality online information which enabled clients to best match themselves to treatment; flexible and simple intake procedures with skilled and welcoming staff; the presence and quality of social and other resources (such as families, peers and private health insurance) which enabled quicker access; and prior experience in the treatment system which helped clients to gain important knowledge and skills to improve future access. We discuss implications of these findings, including that waiting lists significantly exacerbate inequity, but that this could be ameliorated by providing peer‐support to those trying to gain entry, especially clients who do not have family and friends for help during this period. The findings also point to the way that client self‐determination is central to all positive treatment entry experiences, and that supporting clients to find 'the right fit' in relation to treatment options improves their experiences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and aims: Mathematical modelling has demonstrated the theoretical feasibility of HCV treatment‐as‐prevention strategies in custodial settings, yet limited empirical data exists. The Australian 'Surveillance and Treatment of Prisoners with Hepatitis C' study is the world's first trial of hepatitis C virus (HCV) treatment‐as‐prevention in prison. This study aimed to analyse how expert stakeholders involved in the Australian HCV response assessed the acceptability of HCV treatment‐as‐prevention in prison using interview data from the SToP‐C qualitative substudy. Design and setting: Qualitative analysis using semi‐structured interviews in Australia. Participants: Nineteen key HCV experts. Measurements Drawing upon Sekhon's theoretical framework of acceptability, data were organized thematically under four component constructs of acceptability: affective attitude; ethicality; opportunity costs; and perceived effectiveness. Findings Most differences in participant assessments of acceptability were a matter of relative emphasis and prioritization rather than absolute polarity. Nonetheless, a small minority of participants was overtly critical of the approach. Arguing against the focus on treatment, they instead advocated for prevention‐as‐prevention, including the improvement and expansion of existing harm reduction measures. Conclusions: Qualitative analysis of expert stakeholder assessments of the acceptability of hepatitis C virus treatment‐as‐prevention in Australian prisons found no opposition to the universal rollout of direct‐acting anti‐virals, but most voiced concern regarding the lack of effective primary prevention in Australian prisons. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Australia's prisons have a high chronic hepatitis C (HCV) prevalence (8 %). Antiviral therapies and prison-based hepatitis services are available, but only a minority of those eligible are being treated. Improving the HCV public health literacy of the prison sector via targeted education may overcome key barriers to scale-up treatment. This paper describes the: i) HCV public health literacy of the prison setting; ii) barriers and solutions for HCV education and service engagement; iii) HCV education program co-design and development processes; and iv) HepPEd resources. A national needs assessment was conducted to analyse the HCV public health literacy of the target audience groups in the prisons (healthcare providers; custodial officers; people in prison) to inform development of a prison-specific HCV education program (HepPEd). Structured interviews were conducted with key informants (n = 40). Three National Steering Committees, one for each target group, were convened to co-design and develop HepPEd. Only healthcare providers involved with hepatitis care were considered to have 'good' to 'very good' HCV health literacy (including knowledge, attitudes, and capabilities), with all other groups considered less favourably. Key barriers identified included being time poor (healthcare providers), poor motivation (custodial officers) and stigma (people in prison). Peer education delivery was considered a key facilitator for custodial officers and people in prison. A suite of multi-modal resources addressing the perceived gaps in HCV health literacy was developed, with a broad theme of 'Let's talk about hep C'. Delivery of HepPEd was designed to overcome key barriers and utilise facilitators for each group. Significant gaps in HCV health literacy were perceived amongst the target audience groups. The comprehensive co-design and development processes utilised in HepPEd suggest the program will be well-placed to improve the HCV public health literacy of the prison sector and thereby enhance HCV testing and treatment rates amongst people in prison. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: With direct-acting antivirals dramatically reshaping the public health response to the hepatitis C virus (HCV), prisons are set to play a critical role in elimination efforts. Despite the theoretical demonstration of HCV treatment-as-prevention in prison in mathematical modeling, limited empirical data exist. The Australian 'Surveillance and Treatment of Prisoners with Hepatitis C' project (SToP-C) is the world's first trial of HCV treatment-as-prevention in prison. Drawing on interviews with HCV expert stakeholders, this paper explores the factors respondents identified as crucial to the success of future scale-up. Accounting for such perspectives matters because of the influence expert discourse has in shaping implementation. Methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with nineteen HCV experts working across key policy, advocacy, research and clinical dimensions of the Australian HCV response. Data were coded using qualitative data management software (NVivo 11). Analysis proceeded via a hybrid deductive and inductive approach. Results: Notwithstanding concerns regarding the lack of primary prevention in Australian prisons, stakeholders reported broad levels of support for the intervention and for the future scale-up of HCV treatment. A number of considerations, both external and internal to the prison system, were identified as key. The principal external factor was an enabling political-cum-policy environment; internal factors included: obtaining support from prisons' executive and custodial staff; promoting health within a security-first institutional culture; allocating time for treatment within prisoners' tightly regulated schedules; ensuring institutional stability during treatment given the routine movement of prisoners between prisons; prioritizing the availability of retreatment given the paucity of primary prevention; and securing sufficient clinical space for treatment. Conclusion: The challenges to implementation are considerable, ranging from macrolevel concerns to in-prison logistical matters. Nonetheless, we argue that prisons remain an obvious setting for treatment scale-up, not only for prevention and potential elimination benefit, but for the treatment opportunities they afford a socially disadvantaged and underserved population. While noting widespread concerns among respondents regarding the paucity of primary prevention in Australian prisons, results indicate broad levels of support among expert stakeholders for HCV treatment scale-up in prison. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The recent advent of new, highly effective, direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) is dramatically reshaping the hepatitis C virus (HCV) treatment landscape and prisons are set to play an important role. While there is a substantial literature addressing the centrality of stigma to experiences of living with HCV in the community, including as a barrier to treatment, scant attention has been paid to documenting how HCV-stigma figures within the distinct sociality of prison life. This article focuses on initial, pretreatment interviews with prisoner participants (n = 32) from the first, real-world trial of HCV 'treatment-as-prevention' in prison: Australia's Surveillance and Treatment of Prisoners with Hepatitis C (SToP-C) study. Drawing on recent developments in stigma theory alongside Goffman's original insights, we posit HCV-stigma as a relational, contingent and political process, materialised across the network of power relations in prison. Participant accounts describe a complex picture, with reports ranging from those suggesting the 'normalisation' of HCV to those detailing the potential effects of HCV-stigma, including additional disciplinary attention from officers and/or the rejection from peer networks by fellow prisoners. While acknowledging the limiting effects HCV-stigma may yet have on treatment-as-prevention efforts, we speculate that with committed political leadership, operational investment, sufficient prisoner engagement, interventions such as SToP-C may also afford opportunities for such effects to be challenged, disrupted, and even left behind. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Hepatitis C (HCV) is highly prevalent in First Nations communities globally. Barriers in the uptake of testing and treatment create challenges to realise elimination of HCV in these communities. In efforts to reduce barriers to testing and treatment, the SCALE-C study implemented an HCV test-and-treat intervention integrating point-of-care HCV testing and FibroScan®. SCALE-C was carried out at four Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Services (ACCHS; renowned for providing culturally safe care) in four regional towns in Australia. This qualitative analysis sought to understand healthcare provider and patient perceptions of acceptability of a community-based HCV test-and-treat intervention within ACCHS. Semi-structured interviews were undertaken with 23 patient participants and 14 healthcare personnel (including Aboriginal Health Workers/Practitioners, nurses, general practitioners, and practice managers) from across the four ACCHS involved in SCALE-C. A coding framework was developed among study authors and informed by Sekhon's Theoretical Framework of Acceptability. The SCALE-C intervention enabled opportunities for healthcare providers to listen to patients, and for patients to feel heard (affective attitude). HCV testing was opportunistic and often occurred outside of the allocated SCALE-C clinical hours (burden). For patients, HCV testing within SCALE-C was viewed as a moral responsibility and ensured protection of self and others (ethicality). For personnel, SCALE-C (including following up visits) was regarded as an opportunity to engage with patients especially those with complex health needs which may be unrelated to HCV risk factors (ethicality). Patients and personnel widely regarded the SCALE-C intervention to be effective , and the test-and-treat model was preferable for both patients and personnel. The SCALE-C intervention was broadly perceived to be acceptable among both healthcare providers and patients within ACCHS. Whilst the prioritisation of HCV was viewed as increasing patient engagement, it was also regarded as an opportunity for addressing other healthcare needs within Aboriginal communities. HCV test-and-treat models of care delivered by ACCHS simplify the HCV care pathway and ensure all HCV care is provided in a culturally safe setting (e.g., patients did not need to attend external services such as pathology). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Current diagnostic pathways require multiple healthcare provider visits and lead to a drop-off in the hepatitis C virus (HCV) testing and treatment care cascade. In prison settings, frequent transitioning between prisons and the community further reduces uptake of testing and treatment. The PIVOT study evaluated a 'one-stop-shop' intervention integrating point-of-care HCV RNA testing, Fibroscan®-based liver disease assessment, and treatment prescription at a reception prison in Australia. This qualitative sub-study was undertaken to assess patient acceptability of point-of-care HCV RNA testing in the reception prison setting.Methods: Twenty-four men in prison enrolled in the PIVOT study participated in semi-structured interviews; all of whom had undergone point-of-care HCV RNA testing in the PIVOT study. Patients were purposefully selected to ensure comparable representation of people with and without a history of injecting drug use and people with and without prior HCV testing experience (standard venepuncture). Sekhon's Theoretical Framework of Acceptability, consisting of seven components (affective attitude, burden, ethicality, intervention coherence, opportunity cost, perceived effectiveness, and self-efficacy), informed this qualitative analysis.Results: Acceptability of fingerstick point-of-care HCV RNA testing was evident across four components: affective attitude, burden, self-efficacy, and perceived effectiveness. Patients described point-of-care testing as "quick and easy" (affective attitude), while swift results were viewed as alleviating anxiety associated with long wait times for standard pathology (burden). Patients averse to venepuncture (e.g., fear of needles or poor vein health) found the fingerstick method accessible, thereby enabling participation in HCV screening (self-efficacy). Participants attributed confidence in test results predominantly due to trust in the healthcare system or trust in the personnel administering the test (perceived effectiveness).Conclusion: People entering custody perceive fingerstick HCV RNA point-of-care testing to be an acceptable method and preferred this method to standard HCV testing via venepuncture. In light of these findings, prison health authorities should consider the role of opt-out point-of-care HCV RNA testing upon prison entry. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Prisons are key venues for scaling-up hepatitis C virus (HCV) testing and treatment. Complex clinical pathways and frequent movements of people in prison remain barriers to HCV care. This study evaluated the impact of a 'one-stop-shop' point-of-care HCV RNA testing intervention on treatment uptake compared with standard of care among people recently incarcerated in Australia. PIVOT was a prospective, non-concurrent, controlled study comparing HCV treatment uptake during 'standard of care' (n = 239; November 2019–May 2020) and a 'one-stop-shop' intervention (n = 301; June 2020–April 2021) in one reception prison in Australia. The primary endpoint was uptake of direct-acting antiviral treatment at 12 weeks from enrolment. Secondary outcomes included the time taken from enrolment to each stage in the care cascade. A total of 540 male participants were enrolled. Median age (29 vs. 28 years) and history of injecting drug use (48% vs. 42%) were similar between standard of care and intervention phases. Among people diagnosed with current HCV infection (n = 18/63 in the standard of care phase vs. n = 30/298 in the intervention phase), the proportion initiating direct-acting antiviral treatment within 12 weeks from enrolment in the intervention phase was higher (93% [95% CI 0.78–0.99] vs. 22% [95% CI 0.64–0.48]; p <0.001), and the median time to treatment initiation was shorter (6 days [IQR 5–7] vs. 99 days [IQR 57–127]; p <0.001) compared to standard of care. The 'one-stop-shop' intervention enhanced treatment uptake and reduced time to treatment initiation among people recently incarcerated in Australia, thereby overcoming key barriers to treatment scale-up in the prison sector. This study provides important insights for policymakers regarding optimal HCV testing and treatment pathways for people newly incarcerated in prisons. The findings will improve health outcomes in people in prison with chronic HCV infection by increasing testing and treatment, thereby reducing infections, liver-related morbidity/mortality, and comorbidities. The findings will change clinical practice, clinical guidelines, and international guidance, and will inform future research and national and regional strategies, in particular regarding point-of-care testing, which is being rapidly scaled-up in various settings globally. The economic impact will likely include health budget savings resulting from reduced negative health outcomes relating to HCV, and health system efficiencies resulting from the introduction of simplified models of care. This study is registered at Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04809246). [Display omitted] • The proportion tested for HCV was higher in the intervention (99%) compared with the control phase (26%). • The proportion treated for HCV was higher in the intervention (93%) compared with the control phase (22%). • Median time from diagnosis to treatment initiation was shorter in the intervention than in the control phase (6 vs. 25 days). • Combining all key HCV assessments into a single visit improved efficiencies and enhanced testing and treatment uptake. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Opioid agonist treatment (OAT) is associated with a reduced likelihood of hepatitis C incidence, nonfatal overdose, and (re)incarceration among people who inject drugs (PWID), yet factors underpinning decisions to access OAT in prison and postrelease are not well understood. The aim of the qualitative study was to explore the perspectives of OAT access while in prison among PWID recently released from prison in Australia. Eligible participants enrolled in the SuperMix cohort (n = 1303) were invited to take part in a semi-structured interview in Victoria, Australia. Inclusion criteria were informed consent, aged ≥18 years, history of injection drug use, incarcerated for ≥3 months, and released from custody <12 months. The study team analysed data via a candidacy framework to account for macro-structural influences. Among 48 participants (33 male; ten Aboriginal), most injected drugs in the prior month (n = 41) with heroin the most frequently injected (n = 33) and nearly half (n = 23) were currently on OAT (primarily methadone). Most participants described the navigation and permeability of OAT services in prison as convoluted. If not on OAT pre-entry, prison policies often restricted access, leaving participants to withdraw in cells. In turn, some participants commenced OAT postrelease to ensure OAT continuity of care if reincarcerated. Other participants who experienced delayed access to OAT in prison stated no need to initiate while in prison or postrelease as they were now "clean". Last, implementation of OAT delivery in prison (e.g., lack of confidentiality) frequently led to changes in OAT type to avoid peer violence (pressure to divert OAT). Findings draw attention to simplistic notions of OAT accessibility in prisons, illuminating how structural determinants influence choice in PWID decision-making. Suboptimal access and acceptability of OAT delivery in prisons will continue to place PWID at risk of harm postrelease (e.g., overdose). • Most participants felt that access to prison OAT was suboptimal. • Some participants commenced OAT in the community to ensure prison OAT continuity. • Implementation barriers to prison OAT must be minimised to optimise uptake. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) is a significant concern within prison populations. Provision of HCV testing and treatment for people in prison is expanding and a key component of global elimination efforts. Despite growing service availability, several challenges remain in HCV testing and treatment engagement during incarceration. The PIVOT study demonstrated that a 'one-stop-shop' intervention (point-of-care HCV RNA testing, Fibroscan®, nurse-led clinical assessment, and fast-tracked direct-acting antiviral prescription) enhanced HCV testing and treatment at a reception prison in Australia. Utilising Squier et al's Health Literacy Skills Framework, this analysis aimed to understand HCV health literacy and educational needs among people at a reception prison in Australia. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with twenty-four male PIVOT study participants. Purposive sampling ensured comparable representation of those with: 1) prior HCV testing history (standard pathology / no prior testing), and 2) injecting drug use history (IDU; ever / never). Varied HCV health literacy levels and educational needs were evident amongst people in prison. Whilst those with multiple incarceration episodes and IDU history (prior knowledge) appeared to have stronger HCV health literacy than those without, substantial gaps in HCV health literacy were evident. Knowledge of HCV transmission risks in prison was high, and most understood the importance of HCV testing and treatment in prison (comprehension) , but ability to engage with HCV testing and treatment services, participation in safe injecting behaviours (health-related behaviours) , and knowledge of re-infection and re-treatment, within the context of the prison environment, were suboptimal. There was a general desire for increased HCV education in prison. Gaps in HCV health literacy among people in prison were evident, indicating opportunities for improvement. A targeted HCV education program for people in prison, addressing the gaps identified in this analysis, may enhance HCV testing, treatment, and prevention by fostering stronger HCV health literacy among people in prison. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: There exist multiple regulatory layers for point-of-care (POC) testing to be implemented within Australia. This qualitative analysis sought to understand the pre-market barriers and facilitators to scale-up infectious diseases POC testing in primary care settings at the national level., Methods: Key informant interviews were undertaken with people (n = 30) working in high- level positions relevant to infectious diseases POC testing in Australia. Participants were recruited from federal and state health departments, industry, and nongovernment national peak bodies. The Unitaid scalability framework informed this analysis to understand barriers and enablers to creating access conditions and establishing country readiness for market access of POC tests., Results: Participants identified regulatory frameworks as significant barriers to market access. National strategies and advocacy were viewed as potential enablers to establishing country readiness. It was recommended that the national system for universal health care should fund infectious disease POC tests to ensure financial sustainability, though the existing pathology infrastructure was regarded as a likely inhibitor., Conclusions: Current regulatory frameworks inhibit market access for infectious disease POC testing devices for use in the primary care setting. National advocacy is urgently needed to gain government support and align national policies with regulatory frameworks., Competing Interests: Declarations Ethics approval and consent to participate Ethics approvals were obtained from: University of New South Wales Human Research Ethics Committee (HC200472), and Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies Research Ethics Committee (EO209-20201002). The Participant Information Statement was attached to the initial email invitation and reviewed with participants prior to interview commencement. Informed verbal consent was obtained from all participants prior to commencement of interviews. Consent for publication Consent for publication was included in the Participant Information Statement. All participants gave informed consent to participate prior to interview commencement; consent included consent to publish quotes from de-identified transcripts. Additionally, all participants whose quotes were selected for use within this manuscript were given the opportunity to approve/deny inclusion of excerpts via email (none rejected). Competing interests LL, TLA, SL, KD, RM, and CT do not have any competing interests relevant to this study. AK-H has received speaker fees from Cepheid. RG leads two independent grants from National Health and Medical Research Council and Australian Research Council which receive funding and in-kind from Cepheid., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Hepatitis C (HCV) is a global public health concern. There is a global prevalence of 15% among the world's prisoner population, suggesting the need for priority HCV treatment among this population group. New highly efficacious therapies with low side effects, known as directing-acting antivirals, became available under Australia's universal healthcare scheme on 1 March 2016. This creates an opportune time to trial treatment as prevention as an elimination strategy for HCV in prison settings. This paper examines whether policies in Australian jurisdictions support treatment scale-up to achieve elimination among this priority population., Methods: A comprehensive search was conducted using Google and other web-based search functions to locate all publicly available policies in each Australian state and territory related to HCV health and HCV-related prison health. Ministers (corrections and health) were contacted from each jurisdiction to identify any additional policies. Inductive and deductive analyses were conducted for each jurisdiction, with documents being assessed against a set of four a priori criteria. Documents included in the analysis were current at 1 September 2017, or 18 months following treatment availability., Results: A total of 18 documents were located, including both health (n = 12) and corrections/prison health (n = 6) documents relevant to HCV. Jurisdictions ranged in their commitments for delivering HCV harm reduction strategies and treatment availability within the prison setting., Conclusion: Few jurisdictions have updated or published HCV-related health or prisoner health policies following availability of directing-acting antivirals. Current policies do not provide effective support for implementing treatment scale-up that could be possible under universal access to HCV treatment among this priority population.