Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41161846›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2025

An implementation science approach to determine the barriers and facilitators to hepatitis C virus testing in English remand prisons: a mixed-methods study.

Kathryn Jack, William Irving, Zoe Rose, Brian James Thomson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

4 authors.

Kathryn JackInstitute of Care Excellence, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, Nottingham, UK kathryn.jack@nhs.net.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8596-4073
William IrvingSchool of Life Sciences, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7268-3168
Zoe RoseInstitute of Care Excellence, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, Nottingham, UK.
Brian James ThomsonAcute Medicine, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, Nottingham, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTesting rates for hepatitis C virus (HCV) of new prison entrants vary considerably between prisons, with particularly low rates in category B male remand prisons. Improvement in testing rates will require an understanding of the underlying reasons.

objectivesTo investigate the rates and uptake of testing for HCV in new entrants to three category B prisons in England and to use an implementation science framework to analyse the facilitators and barriers to meeting national standards for HCV testing in a prison healthcare environment.

methods

designThis mixed-methods non-interventional study collated three data sets: anti-HCV testing uptake in prisons, plus data on the prior location of each individual (transfer from another prison or community) and their length of stay; a questionnaire designed to identify reasons for decline of a test administered to people in prison (PIP) who refused testing; qualitative interviews with key stakeholders in the process of prison HCV testing, with analysis based on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to enable identification of barriers and facilitators to testing.

settingThis study was conducted in the East Midlands region of England.

participantsData were obtained from three category B male remand prisons.

resultsPrimary outcome measures: This descriptive study sought to understand factors that influence anti-HCV test uptake in three English remand prisons. The selected prisons serve a combined population of 2.3 million and have the capacity to accommodate a total of 2030 prisoners. The testing rates within 4 weeks of arrival in the three prisons over a 12-month study period (March 2022-March 2023) were 17.2%, 28.3% and 42.5%. PIP were more likely to be tested if they arrived from the community compared with interprison transfer (39.13% vs 29.5%). Testing uptake rates increased with length of prison stay (12.4%, 33.6% and 40.7% for stays of 0-7, 15-21 and >28 days, respectively). The most common reasons for not accepting a test were a lack of interest and not wanting to be retested. 13 semistructured interviews revealed 21 barriers and 9 facilitators to testing, summarised in 5 overarching themes: misunderstanding of the concept of opt-out testing; nurses not meeting performance targets due to competing priorities; prison regime hampering healthcare delivery; absence of a specifically appointed co-ordinator who is held to account; incentivising nurses to test and PIP to accept testing.

conclusionsThe rates of testing for HCV in three category B male remand prisons were far below national standards. Key recommendations to improve testing rates, based on the CFIR analysis are (1) to appoint a dedicated senior healthcare staff member who combines responsibility, accountability and authority to proactively oversee testing and ongoing referral processes; (2) to reintroduce an education programme for prison healthcare teams to teach about HCV, cirrhosis and how to deliver 'opt-out' conversations and respond to typical responses and (3) to adopt more widely the strategy already shown to be successful in increasing test uptake by the Hepatitis C Trust HITT programme and offer simple incentives.

Indexed as

Hepatitis CMass ScreeningPatient Acceptance of Health CarePrisonersPrisonsAdultEnglandHepacivirusHumansImplementation ScienceMaleMiddle AgedSurveys and QuestionnairesDelivery of Health Care, IntegratedHepatologyNursing CarePatient Care ManagementPrisonsQUALITATIVE RESEARCH

Identifiers

PMID41161846
PMCPMC12574346

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.