Tyler B. Wray, Philip A. Chan, Jeffrey D. Klausner, Lori M. Ward, Erik M. S. Ocean, Daniel J. Carr, John P. Guigayoma, Siddhi Nadkarni
{"title":"在美国,定期上门提供 HIV 自我检测和后续咨询对不经常进行检测的男男性行为者的 HIV 检测和预防结果的影响:一项务实的虚拟随机对照试验。","authors":"Tyler B. Wray, Philip A. Chan, Jeffrey D. Klausner, Lori M. Ward, Erik M. S. Ocean, Daniel J. Carr, John P. Guigayoma, Siddhi Nadkarni","doi":"10.1002/jia2.26318","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Introduction</h3>\n \n <p>Past research shows that HIV self-testing (HIVST) can increase testing and facilitate more HIV diagnoses relative to clinic testing. However, in the United States, the use of HIVSTs is limited due to concerns that those who use HIVST could be less likely to be linked to care.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>From January 2019 to April 2022, we recruited 811 men who have sex with men (MSM) in the United States who tested infrequently using an online marketing campaign and randomized them 1:1:1 to receive one of the following every 3 months for a year: (1) text message reminders to get tested at a local clinic (control); (2) mailed HIVST kits with access to a free helpline (standard HIVST); and (3) mailed HIVST kits with counselling provided within 24 hours of opening a kit (eTest). Quarterly follow-up surveys assessed HIV testing, sexually transmitted infection (STI) testing, pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) use and sexual risk behaviour.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Findings</h3>\n \n <p>Eight participants were diagnosed with HIV, and all but one were through HIVST. Participants in either HIVST condition, standard or eTest, had significantly higher odds of any testing (<i>OR</i> = 7.9, 95% CI = 4.9−12.9 and <i>OR =</i> 6.6, 95% CI = 4.2−10.5) and repeat testing (>1 test; <i>OR</i> = 8.5, 95% CI = 5.7−12.6; <i>OR =</i> 8.9, 95% CI = 6.1−13.4) over 12 months relative to the control group. Rates of STI testing and PrEP uptake did not differ across study condition, but those in the eTest condition reported 27% fewer sexual risk events across the study period relative to other groups.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>HIVST vastly increased testing, encouraged more regular testing among MSM, and identified nearly all new cases, suggesting that HIVST could diagnose HIV acquisition earlier. Providing timely follow-up counselling after HIVST did not increase rates of STI testing or PrEP use, but some evidence suggested that counselling may have reduced sexual risk behaviour. To encourage more optimal testing, programmes should incorporate HIVST and ship kits directly to recipients at regular intervals.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":201,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the International AIDS Society","volume":"27 7","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/jia2.26318","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The effects of regular home delivery of HIV self-testing and follow-up counselling on HIV testing and prevention outcomes in men who have sex with men who test infrequently in the United States: a pragmatic, virtual randomized controlled trial\",\"authors\":\"Tyler B. Wray, Philip A. Chan, Jeffrey D. Klausner, Lori M. Ward, Erik M. S. Ocean, Daniel J. Carr, John P. Guigayoma, Siddhi Nadkarni\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/jia2.26318\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Introduction</h3>\\n \\n <p>Past research shows that HIV self-testing (HIVST) can increase testing and facilitate more HIV diagnoses relative to clinic testing. However, in the United States, the use of HIVSTs is limited due to concerns that those who use HIVST could be less likely to be linked to care.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>From January 2019 to April 2022, we recruited 811 men who have sex with men (MSM) in the United States who tested infrequently using an online marketing campaign and randomized them 1:1:1 to receive one of the following every 3 months for a year: (1) text message reminders to get tested at a local clinic (control); (2) mailed HIVST kits with access to a free helpline (standard HIVST); and (3) mailed HIVST kits with counselling provided within 24 hours of opening a kit (eTest). Quarterly follow-up surveys assessed HIV testing, sexually transmitted infection (STI) testing, pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) use and sexual risk behaviour.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Findings</h3>\\n \\n <p>Eight participants were diagnosed with HIV, and all but one were through HIVST. Participants in either HIVST condition, standard or eTest, had significantly higher odds of any testing (<i>OR</i> = 7.9, 95% CI = 4.9−12.9 and <i>OR =</i> 6.6, 95% CI = 4.2−10.5) and repeat testing (>1 test; <i>OR</i> = 8.5, 95% CI = 5.7−12.6; <i>OR =</i> 8.9, 95% CI = 6.1−13.4) over 12 months relative to the control group. Rates of STI testing and PrEP uptake did not differ across study condition, but those in the eTest condition reported 27% fewer sexual risk events across the study period relative to other groups.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\\n \\n <p>HIVST vastly increased testing, encouraged more regular testing among MSM, and identified nearly all new cases, suggesting that HIVST could diagnose HIV acquisition earlier. Providing timely follow-up counselling after HIVST did not increase rates of STI testing or PrEP use, but some evidence suggested that counselling may have reduced sexual risk behaviour. To encourage more optimal testing, programmes should incorporate HIVST and ship kits directly to recipients at regular intervals.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":201,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of the International AIDS Society\",\"volume\":\"27 7\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/jia2.26318\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of the International AIDS Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jia2.26318\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"IMMUNOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the International AIDS Society","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jia2.26318","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"IMMUNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
导言:过去的研究表明,与诊所检测相比,HIV 自我检测(HIVST)可以增加检测次数,并有助于更多的 HIV 诊断。然而,在美国,HIVST 的使用受到了限制,因为人们担心使用 HIVST 的人不太可能与护理联系起来:从 2019 年 1 月到 2022 年 4 月,我们通过在线营销活动在美国招募了 811 名不经常接受检测的男男性行为者(MSM),并以 1:1:1 的比例随机分配他们在一年内每 3 个月接受以下其中一种检测:(1) 短信提醒到当地诊所接受检测(对照组);(2) 邮寄 HIVST 检测包,并提供免费帮助热线(标准 HIVST);(3) 邮寄 HIVST 检测包,并在打开检测包后 24 小时内提供咨询(eTest)。每季度进行一次跟踪调查,评估 HIV 检测、性传播感染 (STI) 检测、暴露前预防 (PrEP) 的使用情况以及性风险行为:八名参与者被确诊感染了艾滋病毒,除一人外,其他人都是通过 HIVST 检测确诊的。与对照组相比,接受标准或电子检测的 HIVST 参与者在 12 个月内接受任何检测(OR = 7.9,95% CI = 4.9-12.9 和 OR = 6.6,95% CI = 4.2-10.5)和重复检测(>1 次检测;OR = 8.5,95% CI = 5.7-12.6; OR = 8.9,95% CI = 6.1-13.4)的几率明显更高。不同研究条件下的性传播感染检测率和 PrEP 采用率没有差异,但在整个研究期间,eTest 条件下报告的性风险事件比其他组少 27%:结论:HIVST 大幅提高了检测率,鼓励男男性行为者更定期地进行检测,并发现了几乎所有新病例,这表明 HIVST 可以更早地诊断出是否感染了艾滋病毒。在艾滋病毒检测后及时提供后续咨询并没有提高性传播感染检测率或 PrEP 的使用率,但一些证据表明,咨询可能会减少性风险行为。为鼓励进行更优化的检测,方案应纳入艾滋病毒检测,并定期将检测包直接寄给受检者。
The effects of regular home delivery of HIV self-testing and follow-up counselling on HIV testing and prevention outcomes in men who have sex with men who test infrequently in the United States: a pragmatic, virtual randomized controlled trial
Introduction
Past research shows that HIV self-testing (HIVST) can increase testing and facilitate more HIV diagnoses relative to clinic testing. However, in the United States, the use of HIVSTs is limited due to concerns that those who use HIVST could be less likely to be linked to care.
Methods
From January 2019 to April 2022, we recruited 811 men who have sex with men (MSM) in the United States who tested infrequently using an online marketing campaign and randomized them 1:1:1 to receive one of the following every 3 months for a year: (1) text message reminders to get tested at a local clinic (control); (2) mailed HIVST kits with access to a free helpline (standard HIVST); and (3) mailed HIVST kits with counselling provided within 24 hours of opening a kit (eTest). Quarterly follow-up surveys assessed HIV testing, sexually transmitted infection (STI) testing, pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) use and sexual risk behaviour.
Findings
Eight participants were diagnosed with HIV, and all but one were through HIVST. Participants in either HIVST condition, standard or eTest, had significantly higher odds of any testing (OR = 7.9, 95% CI = 4.9−12.9 and OR = 6.6, 95% CI = 4.2−10.5) and repeat testing (>1 test; OR = 8.5, 95% CI = 5.7−12.6; OR = 8.9, 95% CI = 6.1−13.4) over 12 months relative to the control group. Rates of STI testing and PrEP uptake did not differ across study condition, but those in the eTest condition reported 27% fewer sexual risk events across the study period relative to other groups.
Conclusions
HIVST vastly increased testing, encouraged more regular testing among MSM, and identified nearly all new cases, suggesting that HIVST could diagnose HIV acquisition earlier. Providing timely follow-up counselling after HIVST did not increase rates of STI testing or PrEP use, but some evidence suggested that counselling may have reduced sexual risk behaviour. To encourage more optimal testing, programmes should incorporate HIVST and ship kits directly to recipients at regular intervals.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of the International AIDS Society (JIAS) is a peer-reviewed and Open Access journal for the generation and dissemination of evidence from a wide range of disciplines: basic and biomedical sciences; behavioural sciences; epidemiology; clinical sciences; health economics and health policy; operations research and implementation sciences; and social sciences and humanities. Submission of HIV research carried out in low- and middle-income countries is strongly encouraged.