Search

BackgroundPregnant and postpartum women in Sub-Saharan Africa are at high risk of HIV acquisition. We evaluated a person-centered dynamic choice intervention for HIV prevention (DCP) among women attending antenatal and postnatal care.SettingRural Kenya and Uganda.MethodsWomen (aged 15 years or older) at risk of HIV acquisition seen at antenatal and postnatal care clinics were individually randomized to DCP vs. standard of care (SEARCH; NCT04810650). The DCP intervention included structured client choice of product (daily oral pre-exposure prophylaxis or postexposure prophylaxis), service location (clinic or out of facility), and HIV testing modality (self-test or provider-administered), with option to switch over time and person-centered care (phone access to clinician, structured barrier assessment and counseling, and provider training). The primary outcome was biomedical prevention coverage-proportion of 48-week follow-up with self-reported pre-exposure prophylaxis or postexposure prophylaxis use, compared between arms using targeted maximum likelihood estimation.ResultsBetween April and July 2021, we enrolled 400 women (203 intervention and 197 control); 38% were pregnant, 52% were aged 15-24 years, and 94% reported no pre-exposure prophylaxis or postexposure prophylaxis use for ≥6 months before baseline. Among 384/400 participants (96%) with outcome ascertained, DCP increased biomedical prevention coverage 40% (95% CI: 34% to 47%; P < 0.001); the coverage was 70% in intervention vs. 29% in control. DCP also increased coverage during months at risk of HIV (81% in intervention, 43% in control; 38% absolute increase; 95% CI: 31% to 45%; P < 0.001).ConclusionA person-centered dynamic choice intervention that provided flexibility in product, testing, and service location more than doubled biomedical HIV prevention coverage in a high-risk population already routinely offered access to biomedical prevention options.

IntroductionOptimizing HIV prevention may require structured approaches for providing client-centred choices as well as community-based entry points and delivery. We evaluated the effect of a dynamic choice model for HIV prevention, delivered by community health workers (CHWs) with clinician support, on the use of biomedical prevention among persons at risk of HIV in rural East Africa.MethodsWe conducted a cluster randomized trial among persons (≥15 years) with current or anticipated HIV risk in 16 villages in Uganda and Kenya (SEARCH; NCT04810650). The intervention was a client-centred HIV prevention model, including (1) structured client choice of product (pre-exposure prophylaxis [PrEP] or post-exposure prophylaxis [PEP]), service location (clinic or out-of-clinic) and HIV testing modality (self-test or rapid test), with the ability to switch over time; (2) a structured assessment of patient barriers and development of a personalized support plan; and (3) phone access to a clinician 24/7. The intervention was delivered by CHWs and supported by clinicians who oversaw PrEP and PEP initiation and monitoring. Participants in control villages were referred to local health facilities for HIV prevention services, delivered by Ministry of Health staff. The primary outcome was biomedical prevention coverage: a proportion of 48-week follow-up with self-reported PrEP or PEP use.ResultsFrom May to July 2021, we enrolled 429 people (212 intervention; 217 control): 57% women and 35% aged 15-24 years. Among intervention participants, 58% chose PrEP and 58% chose PEP at least once over follow-up; self-testing increased from 52% (baseline) to 71% (week 48); ≥98% chose out-of-facility service delivery. Among 413 (96%) participants with the primary outcome ascertained, average biomedical prevention coverage was 28.0% in the intervention versus 0.5% in the control: a difference of 27.5% (95% CI: 23.0-31.9%, p

IntroductionMulti-disease community health campaigns can be effective for population-wide HIV testing in a research setting (SEARCH: NCT01864603). We sought to evaluate feasibility and uptake of a community-led health campaign (CLHC) planned and implemented by village leaders and local clinic workers in Uganda.MethodsOver five months in 2014, locally elected village leaders and Ministry of Health (MoH) clinic staff in a rural parish in Uganda planned a census followed by a CLHC, after training by two SEARCH trial consultants and by leaders from a neighbouring parish that had previously participated in a SEARCH health campaign. We defined feasibility as: (1) elected leaders' participation in training and implementation of pre-campaign census and mobilization activities; (2) implementation of all campaign activities by MoH-funded, local clinic staff; and (3) community participation in the campaign, including point-of-care screening for HIV, malaria, hypertension and diabetes, and same-day referral for male circumcision and family planning (FP). Costing of all salaries and supplies was conducted.ResultsElected leaders from all eight villages in the parish participated in CLHC training. They and local clinic staff met monthly to select and plan CLHC services. Village leaders then leveraged existing volunteer health teams to perform a door-to-door census, enumerating 5,202 parish residents over 2 weeks. 2,753 (53%) residents participated in the 6-day CLHC. Of 1,584 adult participants, 1,474 (93%) tested for HIV: 105/1,474 (7.1%) tested HIV positive. 27% (751/2,753) of participants reported fever and underwent malaria rapid diagnostic testing: 5.3% (40/751) tested positive. Among adults screened, 19% (271/1,452) were hypertensive, and 3% (18/637) had a random blood sugar >11.1 mmol/L. Of 805 men and boys (>10 years), 91 (11%) accepted same-day clinic referral and underwent medical circumcision. Of 900 women offered same-day long-term FP referrals, 25 accepted. The CLHC cost, including census, mobilization and testing services, was $23,597 ($8.57/participant).ConclusionElected village leaders successfully planned and conducted a 6-day multi-disease health campaign with service provision by local clinic staff that reached over half of a rural Ugandan community. These data suggest it is feasible for local leaders and clinics to adopt a multi-disease health campaign approach to scale-up HIV testing in rural Africa.

Background: Pregnant and postpartum women in Sub-Saharan Africa are at high risk of HIV acquisition. We evaluated a person-centered dynamic choice intervention for HIV prevention (DCP) among women attending antenatal and postnatal care., Setting: Rural Kenya and Uganda., Methods: Women (aged 15 years or older) at risk of HIV acquisition seen at antenatal and postnatal care clinics were individually randomized to DCP vs. standard of care (SEARCH; NCT04810650). The DCP intervention included structured client choice of product (daily oral pre-exposure prophylaxis or postexposure prophylaxis), service location (clinic or out of facility), and HIV testing modality (self-test or provider-administered), with option to switch over time and person-centered care (phone access to clinician, structured barrier assessment and counseling, and provider training). The primary outcome was biomedical prevention coverage-proportion of 48-week follow-up with self-reported pre-exposure prophylaxis or postexposure prophylaxis use, compared between arms using targeted maximum likelihood estimation., Results: Between April and July 2021, we enrolled 400 women (203 intervention and 197 control); 38% were pregnant, 52% were aged 15-24 years, and 94% reported no pre-exposure prophylaxis or postexposure prophylaxis use for ≥6 months before baseline. Among 384/400 participants (96%) with outcome ascertained, DCP increased biomedical prevention coverage 40% (95% CI: 34% to 47%; P < 0.001); the coverage was 70% in intervention vs. 29% in control. DCP also increased coverage during months at risk of HIV (81% in intervention, 43% in control; 38% absolute increase; 95% CI: 31% to 45%; P < 0.001)., Conclusion: A person-centered dynamic choice intervention that provided flexibility in product, testing, and service location more than doubled biomedical HIV prevention coverage in a high-risk population already routinely offered access to biomedical prevention options., Competing Interests: C.A.K. has received grant support paid to the University of California, San Francisco from Gilead Sciences. The remaining authors have no funding or conflicts of interest to disclose., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)