A process evaluation of community-led distribution of HIV self-testing kits in rural communities in Zimbabwe.

IF 3.5 3区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Itai Kabonga, Lindiwe Mancitshana, Sharon Munhenzva, Nancy Ruhode, Mary K Tumushime, Constancia Watadzaushe, Miriam N Mutseta, Cheryl Johnson, Getrude Ncube, Karin Hatzold, Liz Corbett, Miriam Taegtmeyer, Frances M Cowan, Euphemia Sibanda
{"title":"A process evaluation of community-led distribution of HIV self-testing kits in rural communities in Zimbabwe.","authors":"Itai Kabonga, Lindiwe Mancitshana, Sharon Munhenzva, Nancy Ruhode, Mary K Tumushime, Constancia Watadzaushe, Miriam N Mutseta, Cheryl Johnson, Getrude Ncube, Karin Hatzold, Liz Corbett, Miriam Taegtmeyer, Frances M Cowan, Euphemia Sibanda","doi":"10.1093/heapol/czag101","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Community-led distribution of HIV self-test (HIVST) kits has potential to combine the benefits of community-based HIV testing with the strengths of community-led interventions. We report the process evaluation from the community-led arm of a cluster-randomized trial in rural Zimbabwe comparing community-led versus community-based HIVST distribution where distributors were paid. Twenty communities were supported to design HIVST distribution models that suited their context. We conducted community meetings where we introduced community-led HIVST, including messages on the benefits of viral load suppression (Undetectable = Untransmissible; 'U = U'). Communities determined how, and by whom, distribution would be done. Communities implemented their distribution model over 4-6 weeks. We conducted in-depth interviews with community members (n = 20), distributors (n = 20), and health workers (n = 20) as well as 12 focus group discussions (n = 91) with community members. We triangulated findings with participant observations during community meetings and implementation and descriptively analysed programme data on HIVST distribution. Qualitative data were analysed thematically. Participant observations found communities collaboratively developed and embraced HIVST distribution, demonstrating strong enthusiasm for participation. Messaging on U = U was met with interest and surprise, as many community members were unaware of this information, and became a key motivator for HIVST implementation and uptake. Across communities, 348 distributors distributed 27 812 kits door-to-door and/or from their homes or other community venues. Communities where model development was led by local leaders-rather than collective processes-expressed lower level of satisfaction and had slow implementation. Health workers supported HIVST distribution well, with opportunities for improvement noted. While distributors felt proud to deliver HIVST, many experienced logistical burdens and need for material support from the programme and community. Communities designed HIVST delivery models that were acceptable and feasible; however, efforts to make community-led models sustainable are critical. Delivering messages on U = U should continue to be prioritized and embedded within community-based HIVST distribution models.</p>","PeriodicalId":12926,"journal":{"name":"Health policy and planning","volume":" ","pages":"1543-1555"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13678816/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health policy and planning","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/heapol/czag101","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Community-led distribution of HIV self-test (HIVST) kits has potential to combine the benefits of community-based HIV testing with the strengths of community-led interventions. We report the process evaluation from the community-led arm of a cluster-randomized trial in rural Zimbabwe comparing community-led versus community-based HIVST distribution where distributors were paid. Twenty communities were supported to design HIVST distribution models that suited their context. We conducted community meetings where we introduced community-led HIVST, including messages on the benefits of viral load suppression (Undetectable = Untransmissible; 'U = U'). Communities determined how, and by whom, distribution would be done. Communities implemented their distribution model over 4-6 weeks. We conducted in-depth interviews with community members (n = 20), distributors (n = 20), and health workers (n = 20) as well as 12 focus group discussions (n = 91) with community members. We triangulated findings with participant observations during community meetings and implementation and descriptively analysed programme data on HIVST distribution. Qualitative data were analysed thematically. Participant observations found communities collaboratively developed and embraced HIVST distribution, demonstrating strong enthusiasm for participation. Messaging on U = U was met with interest and surprise, as many community members were unaware of this information, and became a key motivator for HIVST implementation and uptake. Across communities, 348 distributors distributed 27 812 kits door-to-door and/or from their homes or other community venues. Communities where model development was led by local leaders-rather than collective processes-expressed lower level of satisfaction and had slow implementation. Health workers supported HIVST distribution well, with opportunities for improvement noted. While distributors felt proud to deliver HIVST, many experienced logistical burdens and need for material support from the programme and community. Communities designed HIVST delivery models that were acceptable and feasible; however, efforts to make community-led models sustainable are critical. Delivering messages on U = U should continue to be prioritized and embedded within community-based HIVST distribution models.

在津巴布韦农村社区以社区为主导分发艾滋病毒自检包的进程评价。
以社区为主导的艾滋病毒自检包的分发有可能将社区艾滋病毒检测的好处与社区主导的干预措施的优势结合起来。我们报告了在津巴布韦农村进行的一项集群随机试验中,社区主导部分的过程评估,比较了社区主导与社区为基础的艾滋病毒传播,其中分发者是有偿的。支持20个社区设计适合其情况的艾滋病毒传播分发模式。我们举行了社区会议,介绍了社区主导的艾滋病毒防治,包括关于抑制病毒载量的好处的信息(检测不到=不传播;“U=U”)。社区决定如何以及由谁来进行分发。社区在4-6周内执行了他们的分发模式。我们对社区成员(n=20)、分销商(n=20)和卫生工作者(n=20)进行了深入访谈,并与社区成员进行了12次焦点小组讨论(n=91)。我们将调查结果与社区会议和实施期间的参与者观察结果进行了三角测量,并描述性地分析了艾滋病毒传播的规划数据。对定性数据进行专题分析。参与者观察发现,社区合作发展和接受艾滋病毒传播,表现出强烈的参与热情。U=U的消息传递引起了人们的兴趣和惊讶,因为许多社区成员不知道这一信息,并成为实施和接受艾滋病毒传播的关键动力。在各个社区,348名分发者挨家挨户和/或从家中或其他社区场所分发了27,812套工具包。模型开发由当地领导人领导的社区——而不是集体过程——表达了较低的满意度,并且执行缓慢。卫生工作者很好地支持艾滋病毒传播,并指出了改进的机会。虽然分发者对提供艾滋病毒传播感到自豪,但许多人经历了后勤负担,并需要方案和社区的物质支持。社区设计了可接受和可行的艾滋病毒传播交付模式,但努力使社区主导的模式可持续是至关重要的。应继续优先考虑传递U=U信息,并将其纳入基于社区的艾滋病毒传播模式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Health policy and planning
Health policy and planning 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
3.10%
发文量
98
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: Health Policy and Planning publishes health policy and systems research focusing on low- and middle-income countries. Our journal provides an international forum for publishing original and high-quality research that addresses questions pertinent to policy-makers, public health researchers and practitioners. Health Policy and Planning is published 10 times a year.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书