Home-based versus mobile clinic HIV testing and counseling in rural Lesotho: a cluster-randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: The success of HIV programs relies on widely accessible HIV testing and counseling (HTC) services at health facilities as well as in the community. Home-based HTC (HB-HTC) is a popular community-based approach to reach persons who do not test at health facilities. Data comparing HB-HTC to other community-based HTC approaches are very limited. This trial compares HB-HTC to mobile clinic HTC (MC-HTC). METHODS AND FINDINGS: The trial was powered to test the hypothesis of higher HTC uptake in HB-HTC campaigns than in MC-HTC campaigns. Twelve clusters were randomly allocated to HB-HTC or MC-HTC. The six clusters in the HB-HTC group received 30 1-d multi-disease campaigns (five villages per cluster) that delivered services by going door-to-door, whereas the six clusters in MC-HTC group received campaigns involving community gatherings in the 30 villages with subsequent service provision in mobile clinics. Time allocation and human resources were standardized and equal in both groups. All individuals accessing the campaigns with unknown HIV status or whose last HIV test was >12 wk ago and was negative were eligible. All outcomes were assessed at the individual level. Statistical analysis used multivariable logistic regression. Odds ratios and p-values were adjusted for gender, age, and cluster effect. Out of 3,197 participants from the 12 clusters, 2,563 (80.2%) were eligible (HB-HTC: 1,171; MC-HTC: 1,392). The results for the primary outcomes were as follows. Overall HTC uptake was higher in the HB-HTC group than in the MC-HTC group (92.5% versus 86.7%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 2.06; 95% CI: 1.18-3.60; p = 0. 011). Among adolescents and adults ≥ 12 y, HTC uptake did not differ significantly between the two groups; however, in children <12 y, HTC uptake was higher in the HB-HTC arm (87.5% versus 58.7%; aOR: 4.91; 95% CI: 2.41-10.0; p<0.001). Out of those who took up HTC, 114 (4.9%) tested HIV-positive, 39 (3.6%) in the HB-HTC arm and 75 (6.2%) in the MC-HTC arm (aOR: 0.64; 95% CI: 0.48-0.86; p = 0.002). Ten (25.6%) and 19 (25.3%) individuals in the HB-HTC and in the MC-HTC arms, respectively, linked to HIV care within 1 mo after testing positive. Findings for secondary outcomes were as follows: HB-HTC reached more first-time testers, particularly among adolescents and young adults, and had a higher proportion of men among participants. However, after adjusting for clustering, the difference in male participation was not significant anymore. Age distribution among participants and immunological and clinical stages among persons newly diagnosed HIV-positive did not differ significantly between the two groups. Major study limitations included the campaigns' restriction to weekdays and a relatively low HIV prevalence among participants, the latter indicating that both arms may have reached an underexposed population. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that both HB-HTC and MC-HTC can achieve high uptake of HTC. The choice between these two community-based strategies will depend on the objective of the activity: HB-HTC was better in reaching children, individuals who had never tested before, and men, while MC-HTC detected more new HIV infections. The low rate of linkage to care after a positive HIV test warrants future consideration of combining community-based HTC approaches with strategies to improve linkage to care for persons who test HIV-positive. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01459120. Please see later in the article for the Editors' Summary.

Facilitators and barriers to COVID-19 testing in community and clinical settings: Lessons learned from Lesotho and Zambia.

The sudden emergence of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) had a devastating impact on health systems and population health globally. To combat the spread of COVID-19, countries enacted guidelines and safety measures, including testing, contact tracing, and quarantine. It was unclear the extent to which uptake of COVID-19 testing and other health initiatives would be accepted in countries with a history of dealing with widespread communicable disease transmission such as HIV or Tuberculosis. The objective of this study was to understand and compare the facilitators and barriers to COVID-19 testing at hospital sites in two rural communities in Lesotho and community spaces (referred to as hubs) in one urban community in Zambia during active phases of COVID-19 pandemic. Individual interviews and focus group discussions (FGDs) were held during March-October 2021 to explore facilitators and barriers to COVID-19 testing. FGDs with 105 community members and health care workers, and 16 individual interviews with key informants and four mystery shoppers were conducted across the two countries. In Zambia, four mystery shopper observations, and eight hub observations were also conducted. Individual country codebooks were developed and combined; thematic analyses were then conducted using the combined codebook. Findings were compared across the two countries, and most were consistent across the two countries. Two primary themes emerged that related to both barriers and facilitators: (1) structural conditions; (2) social implications and attitudes. The structural conditions that operated as barriers in both countries included public health isolation measures and misinformation. In Lesotho, the cost of tests was an additional barrier. The only structural facilitators were in Zambia where the community hubs were found to be accessible and convenient. The social implication barriers related to fear of isolation, stigma, and mental health implications because of quarantine, perceived pain of the test, and compromised privacy. Social facilitators that led to people testing included experiencing COVID-19 firsthand and knowing people who had died because of COVID-19. Across both countries, primary barriers and facilitators to COVID-19 related to structural conditions and social implications and attitudes. Public health measures can be at odds with social and economic realities; pandemic response should balance public health control and the socio-economic needs. Data from Zambia revealed that community-based settings have the potential to increase uptake of testing services. Community-based campaigns to normalize and reduce stigma for COVID-19 testing services are needed.