Cargando…

Is the HIV burden in India being overestimated?

BACKGROUND: The HIV burden estimate for India has a very wide plausibility range. A recent population-based study in a south Indian district demonstrated that the official method used in India to estimate HIV burden in the population, which directly extrapolates annual sentinel surveillance data fro...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Dandona, Lalit, Lakshmi, Vemu, Kumar, G Anil, Dandona, Rakhi
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2006
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1774574/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17181865
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-6-308
_version_ 1782131724997623808
author Dandona, Lalit
Lakshmi, Vemu
Kumar, G Anil
Dandona, Rakhi
author_facet Dandona, Lalit
Lakshmi, Vemu
Kumar, G Anil
Dandona, Rakhi
author_sort Dandona, Lalit
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The HIV burden estimate for India has a very wide plausibility range. A recent population-based study in a south Indian district demonstrated that the official method used in India to estimate HIV burden in the population, which directly extrapolates annual sentinel surveillance data from large public sector antenatal and sexually transmitted infection (STI) clinics, led to a 2–3 times higher estimate than that based on population-based data. METHODS: We assessed the generalisability of the reasons found in the Guntur study for overestimation of HIV by the official sentinel surveillance based method: addition of substantial unnecessary HIV estimates from STI clinics, the common practice of referral of HIV positive/suspect patients by private practitioners to public hospitals, and a preferential use of public hospitals by lower socioeconomic strata. We derived conservative correction factors for the sentinel surveillance data and titrated these to the four major HIV states in India (Andhra Pradesh, Maharashtra, Karnataka and Tamil Nadu), and examined the impact on the overall HIV estimate for India. RESULTS: HIV data from STI clinics are not used elsewhere in the world as a component of HIV burden estimation in generalised epidemics, and the Guntur study verified that this was unnecessary. The referral of HIV positive/suspect patients from the private to the public sector is a widespread phenomenon in India, which is likely causing an upward distortion in HIV estimates from sentinel surveillance in other parts of India as well. Analysis of data from the nationwide Reproductive and Child Health Survey revealed that lower socioeconomic strata were over-represented among women seeking antenatal care at public hospitals in all major south Indian states, similar to the trend seen in the Guntur study. Application of conservative correction factors derived from the Guntur study reduced the 2005 official sentinel surveillance based HIV estimate of 3.7 million 15–49 years old persons in the four major states to 1.5–2.0 million, which would drop the official total estimate of 5.2 million 15–49 years old persons with HIV in India to 3–3.5 million. CONCLUSION: Plausible and cautious extrapolation of the trends seen in a recent large and rigorous population-based study of HIV in a south Indian district suggests that India is likely grossly overestimating its HIV burden with the current official sentinel surveillance based method. This method needs revision.
format Text
id pubmed-1774574
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2006
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-17745742007-01-18 Is the HIV burden in India being overestimated? Dandona, Lalit Lakshmi, Vemu Kumar, G Anil Dandona, Rakhi BMC Public Health Research Article BACKGROUND: The HIV burden estimate for India has a very wide plausibility range. A recent population-based study in a south Indian district demonstrated that the official method used in India to estimate HIV burden in the population, which directly extrapolates annual sentinel surveillance data from large public sector antenatal and sexually transmitted infection (STI) clinics, led to a 2–3 times higher estimate than that based on population-based data. METHODS: We assessed the generalisability of the reasons found in the Guntur study for overestimation of HIV by the official sentinel surveillance based method: addition of substantial unnecessary HIV estimates from STI clinics, the common practice of referral of HIV positive/suspect patients by private practitioners to public hospitals, and a preferential use of public hospitals by lower socioeconomic strata. We derived conservative correction factors for the sentinel surveillance data and titrated these to the four major HIV states in India (Andhra Pradesh, Maharashtra, Karnataka and Tamil Nadu), and examined the impact on the overall HIV estimate for India. RESULTS: HIV data from STI clinics are not used elsewhere in the world as a component of HIV burden estimation in generalised epidemics, and the Guntur study verified that this was unnecessary. The referral of HIV positive/suspect patients from the private to the public sector is a widespread phenomenon in India, which is likely causing an upward distortion in HIV estimates from sentinel surveillance in other parts of India as well. Analysis of data from the nationwide Reproductive and Child Health Survey revealed that lower socioeconomic strata were over-represented among women seeking antenatal care at public hospitals in all major south Indian states, similar to the trend seen in the Guntur study. Application of conservative correction factors derived from the Guntur study reduced the 2005 official sentinel surveillance based HIV estimate of 3.7 million 15–49 years old persons in the four major states to 1.5–2.0 million, which would drop the official total estimate of 5.2 million 15–49 years old persons with HIV in India to 3–3.5 million. CONCLUSION: Plausible and cautious extrapolation of the trends seen in a recent large and rigorous population-based study of HIV in a south Indian district suggests that India is likely grossly overestimating its HIV burden with the current official sentinel surveillance based method. This method needs revision. BioMed Central 2006-12-20 /pmc/articles/PMC1774574/ /pubmed/17181865 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-6-308 Text en Copyright © 2006 Dandona et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0) ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Dandona, Lalit
Lakshmi, Vemu
Kumar, G Anil
Dandona, Rakhi
Is the HIV burden in India being overestimated?
title Is the HIV burden in India being overestimated?
title_full Is the HIV burden in India being overestimated?
title_fullStr Is the HIV burden in India being overestimated?
title_full_unstemmed Is the HIV burden in India being overestimated?
title_short Is the HIV burden in India being overestimated?
title_sort is the hiv burden in india being overestimated?
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1774574/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17181865
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-6-308
work_keys_str_mv AT dandonalalit isthehivburdeninindiabeingoverestimated
AT lakshmivemu isthehivburdeninindiabeingoverestimated
AT kumarganil isthehivburdeninindiabeingoverestimated
AT dandonarakhi isthehivburdeninindiabeingoverestimated