Search

BackgroundCouples' HIV testing and counselling (CHTC) is associated with greater engagement with HIV prevention and care than individual testing and is cost-effective, but uptake remains suboptimal. Initiating discussion of CHTC might result in distrust between partners. Offering incentives for CHTC could change the focus of the pre-test discussion. We aimed to determine the impact of incentives for CHTC on uptake of couples testing and HIV case diagnosis in rural Zimbabwe.MethodsIn this cluster-randomised trial, 68 rural communities (the clusters) in four districts receiving mobile HIV testing services were randomly assigned (1:1) to incentives for CHTC or not. Allocation was not masked to participants and researchers. Randomisation was stratified by district and proximity to a health facility. Within each stratum random permutation was done to allocate clusters to the study groups. In intervention communities, residents were informed that couples who tested together could select one of three grocery items worth US$1·50. Standard mobilisation for testing was done in comparison communities. The primary outcome was the proportion of individuals testing with a partner. Analysis was by intention to treat. 3 months after CHTC, couple-testers from four communities per group individually completed a telephone survey to evaluate any social harms resulting from incentives or CHTC. The effect of incentives on CHTC was estimated using logistic regression with random effects adjusting for clustering. The trial was registered with the Pan African Clinical Trial Registry, number PACTR201606001630356.FindingsFrom May 26, 2015, to Jan 29, 2016, of 24 679 participants counselled with data recorded, 14 099 (57·1%) were in the intervention group and 10 580 (42·9%) in the comparison group. 7852 (55·7%) testers in the intervention group versus 1062 (10·0%) in the comparison group tested with a partner (adjusted odds ratio 13·5 [95% CI 10·5-17·4]). Among 427 (83·7%) of 510 eligible participants who completed the telephone survey, 11 (2·6%) reported that they were pressured or themselves pressured their partner to test together; none regretted couples' testing. Relationship unrest was reported by eight individuals (1·9%), although none attributed this to incentives.InterpretationSmall non-monetary incentives, which are potentially scalable, were associated with significantly increased CHTC and HIV case diagnosis. Incentives did not increase social harms beyond the few typically encountered with CHTC without incentives. The intervention could help achieve UNAIDS 90-90-90 targets.FundingThe study was funded by the UK Department for International Development, Irish AID, and Swedish SIDA, through Population Services International Zimbabwe under the Integrated Support Program.

INTRODUCTION A tenacious driver of the higher rates of morbidity and mortality amongst adolescents living with HIV (ALHIV) is suboptimal adherence to HIV treatment [1?4] Although the global target is [...], : Introduction: Low rates of viral suppression among adolescents living with HIV (ALHIV) indicate that more effective support is urgently required at scale. The provision of peer support has generated considerable enthusiasm because it has the potential to ameliorate the complex social and relational challenges which underpin suboptimal adherence. Little is known about the impact on young peer supporters themselves, which is the focus of this paper. Methods: We present qualitative findings from the Zvandiri trial investigating the impact of a peer support intervention on the viral load for beneficiaries (ALHIV, aged 13 to 19 years) in Zimbabwe. The Zvandiri peer supporters aged 18 to 24 years, known as community adolescent treatment supporters (CATS), are themselves living with HIV. Individual in?depth interviews were conducted in late 2018 with 17 CATS exploring their experiences of delivering peer support and their own support needs. Interviews were analysed iteratively using thematic analysis. Results: The CATS reported that being peer supporters improved their own adherence behaviour and contributed to an improved sense of self?worth. The social connections between the CATS were a source of comfort and enabled them to develop skills to manage the challenging aspects of their work. Two substantial challenges were identified. First, their work may reveal their HIV status. Second, managing the emotional labour of this caring work; given how commonly the complexity of the beneficiaries? needs mirrored the circumstances of their own difficult lives. Both challenges were ameliorated by the support the CATS provided to each other and ongoing supervision from the adult mentor. There was variation in whether they felt their roles were appropriately valued through the remuneration they received and within the health system. There was a consensus that their experience meant that they would graduate from being a CATS with transferable skills that could enhance their employability. Conclusions: Their experiences illustrate the advantages and opportunities of being a CATS. To minimize potential harms, it is vital to ensure that they feel valued in their role, which can be demonstrated by the provision of appropriate remuneration, recognition and respect, and that there is continued investment in ongoing support through ongoing training and mentoring.