Application of the HIV prevention cascade to identify, develop and evaluate interventions to improve use of prevention methods: examples from a study in east Zimbabwe

INTRODUCTION: The HIV prevention cascade could be used in developing interventions to strengthen implementation of efficacious HIV prevention methods, but its practical utility needs to be demonstrated. We propose a standardized approach to using the cascade to guide identification and evaluation of interventions and demonstrate its feasibility for this purpose through a project to develop interventions to improve HIV prevention methods use by adolescent girls and young women (AGYW) and potential male partners in east Zimbabwe. DISCUSSION: We propose a six‐step approach to using a published generic HIV prevention cascade formulation to develop interventions to increase motivation to use, access to and effective use of an HIV prevention method. These steps are as follows: (1) measure the HIV prevention cascade for the chosen population and method; (2) identify gaps in the cascade; (3) identify explanatory factors (barriers) contributing to observed gaps; (4) review literature to identify relevant theoretical frameworks and interventions; (5) tailor interventions to the local context; and (6) implement and evaluate the interventions using the cascade steps and explanatory factors as outcome indicators in the evaluation design. In the Zimbabwe example, steps 1‐5 aided development of four interventions to overcome barriers to effective use of pre‐exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) in AGYW (15‐24 years) and voluntary medical male circumcision in male partners (15‐29). For young men, prevention cascade analyses identified gaps in motivation and access as barriers to voluntary medical male circumcision uptake, so an intervention was designed including financial incentives and an education session. For AGYW, gaps in motivation (particularly lack of risk perception) and access were identified as barriers to PrEP uptake: an interactive counselling game was developed addressing these barriers. A text messaging intervention was developed to improve PrEP adherence among AGYW, addressing reasons underlying lack of effective PrEP use through improving the capacity (“skills”) to take PrEP effectively. A community‐led intervention (community conversations) was developed addressing community‐level factors underlying gaps in motivation, access and effective use. These interventions are being evaluated currently using outcomes from the HIV prevention cascade (step 6). CONCLUSIONS: The prevention cascade can guide development and evaluation of interventions to strengthen implementation of HIV prevention methods by following the proposed process.