RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The potential of HIV self-testing (HIVST) to cause harm is a concern hindering widespread implementation. The aim of this paper is to understand the relationship between HIVST and harm in SELPHI (An HIV Self-testing Public Health Intervention), the largest randomised trial of HIVST in a high-income country to date. METHODS: 10 111 cis and trans men who have sex with men (MSM) recruited online (geolocation social/sexual networking apps, social media), aged 16+, reporting previous anal intercourse and resident in England or Wales were first randomised 60/40 to baseline HIVST (baseline testing, BT) or not (no baseline testing, nBT) (randomisation A). BT participants reporting negative baseline test, sexual risk at 3 months and interest in further HIVST were randomised to three-monthly HIVST (repeat testing, RT) or not (no repeat testing, nRT) (randomisation B). All received an exit survey collecting data on harms (to relationships, well-being, false results or being pressured/persuaded to test). Nine participants reporting harm were interviewed in-depth about their experiences in an exploratory substudy; qualitative data were analysed narratively. RESULTS: Baseline: predominantly cis MSM, 90% white, 88% gay, 47% university educated and 7% current/former pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) users. Final survey response rate was: nBT=26% (1056/4062), BT=45% (1674/3741), nRT=41% (471/1147), RT=50% (581/1161).Harms were rare and reported by 4% (n=138/3691) in exit surveys, with an additional two false positive results captured in other study surveys. 1% reported harm to relationships and to well-being in BT, nRT and RT combined. In all arms combined, being pressured or persuaded to test was reported by 1% (n=54/3678) and false positive results in 0.7% (n=34/4665).Qualitative analysis revealed harms arose from the kit itself (technological harms), the intervention (intervention harms) or from the social context of the participant (socially emergent harms). Intervention and socially emergent harms did not reduce HIVST acceptability, whereas technological harms did. DISCUSSION: HIVST harms were rare but strategies to link individuals experiencing harms with psychosocial support should be considered for HIVST scale-up. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN20312003.
Asunto(s)
Infecciones por VIH , Minorías Sexuales y de Género , Masculino , Humanos , Homosexualidad Masculina , Autoevaluación , VIH , Gales , Infecciones por VIH/diagnóstico , Infecciones por VIH/prevención & control , Infecciones por VIH/psicología , InglaterraRESUMEN
Current approaches to classifying cognitive impairment in people living with HIV can overestimate disease burden and lead to ambiguity around disease mechanisms. The 2007 criteria for HIV-associated neurocognitive disorders (HAND), sometimes called the Frascati criteria, can falsely classify over 20% of cognitively healthy individuals as having cognitive impairment. Minimum criteria for HAND are met on the basis of performance on cognitive tests alone, which might not be appropriate for populations with diverse educational and socioeconomic backgrounds. Imprecise phenotyping of cognitive impairment can limit mechanistic research, biomarker discovery and treatment trials. Importantly, overestimation of cognitive impairment carries the risk of creating fear among people living with HIV and worsening stigma and discrimination towards these individuals. To address this issue, we established the International HIV-Cognition Working Group, which is globally representative and involves the community of people living with HIV. We reached consensus on six recommendations towards a new approach for diagnosis and classification of cognitive impairment in people living with HIV, intended to focus discussion and debate going forward. We propose the conceptual separation of HIV-associated brain injury - including active or pretreatment legacy damage - from other causes of brain injury occurring in people living with HIV. We suggest moving away from a quantitative neuropsychological approach towards an emphasis on clinical context. Our recommendations are intended to better represent the changing profile of cognitive impairment in people living with HIV in diverse global settings and to provide a clearer framework of classification for clinical management and research studies.
Asunto(s)
Disfunción Cognitiva , Infecciones por VIH , Humanos , VIH , Consenso , Infecciones por VIH/complicaciones , Disfunción Cognitiva/diagnóstico , Disfunción Cognitiva/etiología , Trastornos Neurocognitivos , Pruebas NeuropsicológicasRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: High levels of HIV testing in men who have sex with men remain key to reducing the incidence of HIV. We aimed to assess whether the offer of a single, free HIV self-testing kit led to increased HIV diagnoses with linkage to care. METHODS: SELPHI was an internet-based, open-label, randomised controlled trial that recruited participants via sexual and social networking sites. Eligibility criteria included being a man or trans woman (although trans women are reported separately); being resident in England or Wales, UK; being aged 16 years or older; having had anal intercourse with a man; not having a positive HIV diagnosis; and being willing to provide name, email address, date of birth, and consent to link to national HIV databases. Participants were randomly allocated (3:2) by computer-generated number sequence to receive a free HIV self-test kit (BT group) or to not receive this free kit (nBT group). Online surveys collected data at baseline, 2 weeks after enrolment (BT group only), 3 months after enrolment, and at the end of the study. The primary outcome was confirmed (linked to care) new HIV diagnosis within 3 months of enrolment, analysed by intention to treat. Those assessing the primary outcome were masked to allocation. This study is registered with the ISRCTN Clinical Trials Register, number ISRCTN20312003. FINDINGS: 10â111 participants (6049 in BT group and 4062 in nBT group) enrolled between Feb 16, 2017, and March 1, 2018. The median age of participants was 33 years (IQR 26-44 years); 9000 (89%) participants were White; 8118 (80%) participants were born in the UK; 81 (1%) participants were transgender men; 4706 (47%) participants were university educated; 1537 (15%) participants had never been tested for HIV; and 389 (4%) participants were taking pre-exposure prophylaxis. At enrolment, 7282 (72%) participants reported condomless anal sex with at least one male partner in the previous 3 months. In the BT group, of the 4511 participants for whom HIV testing information was available, 4263 (95%) reported having used the free HIV self-test kit within 3 months.Within 3 months of enrolment there were 19 confirmed new HIV diagnoses (0·31%) in 6049 participants in the BT group and 15 (0·37%) of 4062 in the nBT group (p=0·64). INTERPRETATION: The offer of a single, free HIV self-test did not lead to increased rates of new HIV diagnoses, which could reflect decreasing HIV incidence rates in the UK. Nonetheless, the offer of a free HIV self-testing kit resulted in high HIV testing rates, indicating that self-testing is an attractive testing option for a large group of men who have sex with men. FUNDING: UK National Institute for Health and Care Research.
Asunto(s)
Infecciones por VIH , Minorías Sexuales y de Género , Femenino , Masculino , Humanos , Adulto , Infecciones por VIH/diagnóstico , Infecciones por VIH/epidemiología , Infecciones por VIH/prevención & control , Autoevaluación , Gales/epidemiología , Homosexualidad Masculina , Prueba de VIH , Conducta Sexual , InternetRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Transgender, or trans, people experience a number of barriers to accessing gender-affirming healthcare and have a range of barriers and facilitators to primary care and specialist services, commonly citing discrimination and cisgenderism playing a central role in shaping accessibility. The pathway through primary care to specialist services is a particularly precarious time for trans people, and misinformation and poorly applied protocols can have a detrimental impact on wellbeing. METHOD: We recruited trans participants from an HIV Self-Testing Public Health Intervention (SELPHI) trial to interviews which explored contemporary gender-affirming service experiences, with an aim to examine the path from primary care services through to specialist gender services, in the UK. RESULTS: A narrative synthesis of vignettes and thematic analysis of in-depth qualitative interviews were conducted with twenty trans individuals. We summarise positive and negative accounts of care under three broad categories: Experiences with primary care physicians, referrals to gender identity clinics (GICs), and experiences at GICs. CONCLUSIONS: We discuss implications of this research in terms of how to improve best practice for trans people attempting to access gender-affirming healthcare in the UK. Here we highlight the importance of GP's access to knowledge around pathways and protocols and clinical practice which treats trans patients holistically.
Asunto(s)
Personas Transgénero , Transexualidad , Inglaterra , Femenino , Identidad de Género , Accesibilidad a los Servicios de Salud , Humanos , Masculino , Investigación Cualitativa , GalesRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The SELPHI study (An HIV Self-Testing Public Health Intervention) is an online randomised controlled trial (RCT) of HIV self-testing (HIVST). The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility of recruiting UK men who have sex with men (cis and trans) and trans women who have sex with men to the SELPHI pilot, and the acceptability of the HIVST intervention used among those randomised to receive a kit. METHODS: A mixed-methods approach to assessing trial feasibility and intervention acceptability was taken, using quantitative data from advertising sources and RCT surveys alongside qualitative data from a nested sub-study. RESULTS: Online recruitment and intervention delivery was feasible. The recruitment strategy led to the registration of 1370 participants of whom 76% (1035) successfully enrolled and were randomised 60/40 to baseline testing vs no baseline testing. Advertising platforms performed variably. Reported HIVST kit use increased from 83% at two weeks to 96% at three months. Acceptability was very high across all quantitative measures. Participants described the instructions as easy to use, and the testing process as simple. The support structures in SELPHI were felt to be adequate. Described emotional responses to HIVST varied. CONCLUSIONS: Recruiting to a modest sized HIVST pilot RCT is feasible, and the recruitment, intervention and HIVST kit were acceptable. Research on support needs of individuals with reactive results is warranted.