Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34158047›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2021

Experiences and lessons learned from the real-world implementation of an HIV recent infection testing algorithm in three routine service-delivery settings in Kenya and Zimbabwe.

Mariken M de Wit, Brian Rice, Kathryn Risher, Susie Welty, Wanjiru Waruiru, Sitholubuhle Magutshwa, John Motoku, Daniel Kwaro, Benard Ochieng, Georges Reniers and 4 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 19% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Observational
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors at 5 institutions in 4 countries.

Mariken M de WitLondon School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK. Mariken.dewit@wur.nl.
Brian RiceLondon School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Kathryn RisherLondon School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Susie WeltyUniversity of California, San Francisco, USA.
Wanjiru WaruiruUniversity of California, San Francisco, USA.
Sitholubuhle MagutshwaCentre for Sexual Health and HIV/AIDS Research, Harare, Zimbabwe.
John MotokuEastern Deanery AIDS Relief Programme, Nairobi, Kenya.
Daniel KwaroKenya Medical Research Institute, Kisumu, Kenya.
Benard OchiengKenya Medical Research Institute, Kisumu, Kenya.
Georges ReniersLondon School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Frances CowanCentre for Sexual Health and HIV/AIDS Research, Harare, Zimbabwe.
George RutherfordUniversity of California, San Francisco, USA.
James R HargreavesLondon School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Gary MurphyIndependent consultant in HIV laboratory diagnostics, London, UK.
London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine · GBUniversity of California, San Francisco · USCentre for Sexual Health and HIV AIDS Research · ZWKenya Medical Research Institute · KEEastern Deanery AIDS Relief Program · KE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionTesting for recent HIV infection can distinguish recently acquired infection from long-standing infections. Given current interest in the implementation of recent infection testing algorithms (RITA), we report our experiences in implementing a RITA in three pilot studies and highlight important issues to consider when conducting recency testing in routine settings.

methodsWe applied a RITA, incorporating a limited antigen (LAg) avidity assay, in different routine HIV service-delivery settings in 2018: antenatal care clinics in Siaya County, Kenya, HIV testing and counselling facilities in Nairobi, Kenya, and female sex workers clinics in Zimbabwe. Discussions were conducted with study coordinators, laboratory leads, and facility-based stakeholders to evaluate experiences and lessons learned in relation to implementing recency testing.

resultsIn Siaya County 10/426 (2.3%) of women testing HIV positive were classified as recent, compared to 46/530 (8.7%) of women and men in Nairobi and 33/313 (10.5%) of female sex workers in Zimbabwe. Across the study setting, we observed differences in acceptance, transport and storage of dried blood spot (DBS) or venous blood samples. For example, the acceptance rate when testing venous blood was 11% lower than when using DBS. Integrating our study into existing services ensured a quick start of the study and kept the amount of additional resources required low. From a laboratory perspective, the LAg avidity assay was initially difficult to operationalise, but developing a network of laboratories and experts to work together helped to improve this. A challenge that was not overcome was the returning of RITA test results to clients. This was due to delays in laboratory testing, the need for multiple test results to satisfy the RITA, difficulties in aligning clinic visits, and participants opting not to return for test results.

conclusionWe completed three pilot studies using HIV recency testing based on a RITA in Kenya and Zimbabwe. The main lessons we learned were related to sample collection and handling, LAg avidity assay performance, integration into existing services and returning of test results to participants. Our real-world experience could provide helpful guidance to people currently working on the implementation of HIV recency testing in sub-Saharan Africa.

Indexed as

HIV InfectionsSex WorkersAlgorithmsFemaleHumansKenyaMalePregnancyZimbabweHIVImplementationKenyaRecency testingRITAZimbabwe

Identifiers

PMID34158047
PMCPMC8220670
OpenAlexW3175801499

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.