Cargando…

Feasibility and acceptability of point of care HIV testing in community outreach and GUM drop-in services in the North West of England: A programmatic evaluation

BACKGROUND: In Liverpool, injecting drug users (IDUs), men-who-have-sex-with-men (MSM) and UK Africans experience a disproportionate burden of HIV, yet services do not reach out to these groups and late presentations continue. We set out to: increase testing uptake in targeted marginalized groups th...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: MacPherson, Peter, Chawla, Anu, Jones, Kathy, Coffey, Emer, Spaine, Vida, Harrison, Ian, Jelliman, Pauline, Phillips-Howard, Penelope, Beynon, Caryl, Taegtmeyer, Miriam
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2011
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3128022/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21627851
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-11-419
_version_ 1782207405792165888
author MacPherson, Peter
Chawla, Anu
Jones, Kathy
Coffey, Emer
Spaine, Vida
Harrison, Ian
Jelliman, Pauline
Phillips-Howard, Penelope
Beynon, Caryl
Taegtmeyer, Miriam
author_facet MacPherson, Peter
Chawla, Anu
Jones, Kathy
Coffey, Emer
Spaine, Vida
Harrison, Ian
Jelliman, Pauline
Phillips-Howard, Penelope
Beynon, Caryl
Taegtmeyer, Miriam
author_sort MacPherson, Peter
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: In Liverpool, injecting drug users (IDUs), men-who-have-sex-with-men (MSM) and UK Africans experience a disproportionate burden of HIV, yet services do not reach out to these groups and late presentations continue. We set out to: increase testing uptake in targeted marginalized groups through a community and genitourinary medicine (GUM)-based point of care testing (POCT) programme; and conduct a process evaluation to examine service provider inputs and document service user perceptions of the programme. METHODS: Mixed quantitative, qualitative and process evaluation methods were used. Service providers were trained to use fourth generation rapid antibody/antigen HIV tests. Existing outreach services incorporated POCT into routine practice. Clients completed a semi-structured questionnaire and focus group discussions (FGDs) were held with service providers. RESULTS: Between September 2009 and June 2010, 953 individuals underwent POCT (GUM: 556 [59%]; community-based sites: 397 [42%]). Participants in the community were more likely to be male (p = 0.028), older (p < 0.001), of UK African origin (p < 0.001) and IDUs (p < 0.001) than participants from the GUM clinic. Seventeen new HIV diagnoses were confirmed (prevalence = 1.8%), 16 of whom were in risk exposure categories (prevalence: 16/517, 3.1%). Questionnaires and FGDs showed that clients and service providers were supportive of POCT, highlighting benefits of reaching out to marginalised communities and incorporating HIV prevention messages. CONCLUSIONS: Community and GUM clinic-based POCT for HIV was feasible and acceptable to clients and service providers in a low prevalence setting. It successfully reached target groups, many of whom would not have otherwise tested. We recommend POCT be considered among strategies to increase the uptake of HIV testing among groups who are currently underserved.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3128022
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2011
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-31280222011-07-01 Feasibility and acceptability of point of care HIV testing in community outreach and GUM drop-in services in the North West of England: A programmatic evaluation MacPherson, Peter Chawla, Anu Jones, Kathy Coffey, Emer Spaine, Vida Harrison, Ian Jelliman, Pauline Phillips-Howard, Penelope Beynon, Caryl Taegtmeyer, Miriam BMC Public Health Research Article BACKGROUND: In Liverpool, injecting drug users (IDUs), men-who-have-sex-with-men (MSM) and UK Africans experience a disproportionate burden of HIV, yet services do not reach out to these groups and late presentations continue. We set out to: increase testing uptake in targeted marginalized groups through a community and genitourinary medicine (GUM)-based point of care testing (POCT) programme; and conduct a process evaluation to examine service provider inputs and document service user perceptions of the programme. METHODS: Mixed quantitative, qualitative and process evaluation methods were used. Service providers were trained to use fourth generation rapid antibody/antigen HIV tests. Existing outreach services incorporated POCT into routine practice. Clients completed a semi-structured questionnaire and focus group discussions (FGDs) were held with service providers. RESULTS: Between September 2009 and June 2010, 953 individuals underwent POCT (GUM: 556 [59%]; community-based sites: 397 [42%]). Participants in the community were more likely to be male (p = 0.028), older (p < 0.001), of UK African origin (p < 0.001) and IDUs (p < 0.001) than participants from the GUM clinic. Seventeen new HIV diagnoses were confirmed (prevalence = 1.8%), 16 of whom were in risk exposure categories (prevalence: 16/517, 3.1%). Questionnaires and FGDs showed that clients and service providers were supportive of POCT, highlighting benefits of reaching out to marginalised communities and incorporating HIV prevention messages. CONCLUSIONS: Community and GUM clinic-based POCT for HIV was feasible and acceptable to clients and service providers in a low prevalence setting. It successfully reached target groups, many of whom would not have otherwise tested. We recommend POCT be considered among strategies to increase the uptake of HIV testing among groups who are currently underserved. BioMed Central 2011-06-01 /pmc/articles/PMC3128022/ /pubmed/21627851 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-11-419 Text en Copyright ©2011 MacPherson 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
MacPherson, Peter
Chawla, Anu
Jones, Kathy
Coffey, Emer
Spaine, Vida
Harrison, Ian
Jelliman, Pauline
Phillips-Howard, Penelope
Beynon, Caryl
Taegtmeyer, Miriam
Feasibility and acceptability of point of care HIV testing in community outreach and GUM drop-in services in the North West of England: A programmatic evaluation
title Feasibility and acceptability of point of care HIV testing in community outreach and GUM drop-in services in the North West of England: A programmatic evaluation
title_full Feasibility and acceptability of point of care HIV testing in community outreach and GUM drop-in services in the North West of England: A programmatic evaluation
title_fullStr Feasibility and acceptability of point of care HIV testing in community outreach and GUM drop-in services in the North West of England: A programmatic evaluation
title_full_unstemmed Feasibility and acceptability of point of care HIV testing in community outreach and GUM drop-in services in the North West of England: A programmatic evaluation
title_short Feasibility and acceptability of point of care HIV testing in community outreach and GUM drop-in services in the North West of England: A programmatic evaluation
title_sort feasibility and acceptability of point of care hiv testing in community outreach and gum drop-in services in the north west of england: a programmatic evaluation
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3128022/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21627851
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-11-419
work_keys_str_mv AT macphersonpeter feasibilityandacceptabilityofpointofcarehivtestingincommunityoutreachandgumdropinservicesinthenorthwestofenglandaprogrammaticevaluation
AT chawlaanu feasibilityandacceptabilityofpointofcarehivtestingincommunityoutreachandgumdropinservicesinthenorthwestofenglandaprogrammaticevaluation
AT joneskathy feasibilityandacceptabilityofpointofcarehivtestingincommunityoutreachandgumdropinservicesinthenorthwestofenglandaprogrammaticevaluation
AT coffeyemer feasibilityandacceptabilityofpointofcarehivtestingincommunityoutreachandgumdropinservicesinthenorthwestofenglandaprogrammaticevaluation
AT spainevida feasibilityandacceptabilityofpointofcarehivtestingincommunityoutreachandgumdropinservicesinthenorthwestofenglandaprogrammaticevaluation
AT harrisonian feasibilityandacceptabilityofpointofcarehivtestingincommunityoutreachandgumdropinservicesinthenorthwestofenglandaprogrammaticevaluation
AT jellimanpauline feasibilityandacceptabilityofpointofcarehivtestingincommunityoutreachandgumdropinservicesinthenorthwestofenglandaprogrammaticevaluation
AT phillipshowardpenelope feasibilityandacceptabilityofpointofcarehivtestingincommunityoutreachandgumdropinservicesinthenorthwestofenglandaprogrammaticevaluation
AT beynoncaryl feasibilityandacceptabilityofpointofcarehivtestingincommunityoutreachandgumdropinservicesinthenorthwestofenglandaprogrammaticevaluation
AT taegtmeyermiriam feasibilityandacceptabilityofpointofcarehivtestingincommunityoutreachandgumdropinservicesinthenorthwestofenglandaprogrammaticevaluation