Lifting all boats: strategies to promote equitable bidirectional research training opportunities to enhance global health reciprocal innovation.

Inequities in global health research are well documented. For example, training opportunities for US investigators to conduct research in low-income and middle-income countries (LMIC) have exceeded opportunities for LMIC investigators to train and conduct research in high-income countries. Reciprocal innovation addresses these inequities through collaborative research across diverse global settings.The Fogarty International Center of the US National Institutes of Health (NIH) promotes research capacity building in LMICs. Fogarty K-grants for mentored career development in global health are available for both US and LMIC investigators, whereas the D43 is the standard grant to support institutional training programmes in LMIC. Other NIH institutes fund T32 training grants to support biomedical research training in the USA, but very few have any global health component. Most global health training partnerships have historically focused on research conducted solely in LMIC, with few examples of bidirectional training partnerships. Opportunities may exist to promote global health reciprocal innovation (GHRI) research by twinning K-awardees in the USA with those from LMIC or by intentionally creating partnerships between T32 and D43 training programmes.To sustain independent careers in GHRI research, trainees must be supported through the path to independence known as the K (mentored grantee)-to-R (independent grantee) transition. Opportunities to support this transition include comentorship, research training at both LMIC and US institutions and protected time and resources for research. Other opportunities for sustainability include postdoctoral training before and after the K-award period, absorption of trained researchers into home institutions, South-South training initiatives and innovations to mitigate brain drain.

Cost of integrating assisted partner services in HIV testing services in Kisumu and Homa Bay counties, Kenya: a microcosting study.

BACKGROUND: HIV assisted partner services (aPS), or provider notification and testing for sexual and injecting partners of people diagnosed with HIV, is shown to be safe, effective, and cost-effective and was scaled up within the national HIV testing services (HTS) program in Kenya in 2016. We estimated the costs of integrating aPS into routine HTS within an ongoing aPS scale-up project in western Kenya. METHODS: We conducted microcosting using the payer perspective in 14 facilities offering aPS. Although aPS was offered to both males and females testing HIV-positive (index clients), we only collected data on female index clients and their male sex partners (MSP). We used activity-based costing to identify key aPS activities, inputs, resources, and estimated financial and economic costs of goods and services. We analyzed costs by start-up (August 2018), and recurrent costs one-year after aPS implementation (Kisumu: August 2019; Homa Bay: January 2020) and conducted time-and-motion observations of aPS activities. We estimated the incremental costs of aPS, average cost per MSP traced, tested, testing HIV-positive, and on antiretroviral therapy, cost shares, and costs disaggregated by facility. RESULTS: Overall, the number of MSPs traced, tested, testing HIV-positive, and on antiretroviral therapy was 1027, 869, 370, and 272 respectively. Average unit costs per MSP traced, tested, testing HIV-positive, and on antiretroviral therapy were $34.54, $42.50, $108.71 and $152.28, respectively, which varied by county and facility client volume. The weighted average incremental cost of integrating aPS was $7,485.97 per facility per year, with recurrent costs accounting for approximately 90% of costs. The largest cost drivers were personnel (49%) and transport (13%). Providers spent approximately 25% of the HTS visit obtaining MSP contact information (HIV-negative clients: 13 out of 54 min; HIV-positive clients: 20 out of 96 min), while the median time spent per MSP traced on phone and in-person was 6 min and 2.5 hours, respectively. CONCLUSION: Average facility costs will increase when integrating aPS to HTS with incremental costs largely driven by personnel and transport. Strategies to efficiently utilize healthcare personnel will be critical for effective, affordable, and sustainable aPS.

High Acceptance and Completion of HIV Self-testing Among Diverse Populations of Young People in Kenya Using a Community-Based Distribution Strategy.

Oral HIV self-testing (HIVST) may expand access to testing among hard-to-reach reach adolescents and young adults (AYA). We evaluated community-based HIVST services for AYA in an urban settlement in Kenya. Peer-mobilizers recruited AYA ages 15-24 through homes, bars/clubs, and pharmacies. Participants were offered oral HIVST, optional assistance and post-test counseling. Outcomes were HIVST acceptance and completion (self-report and returned kits). Surveys were given at enrollment, post-testing, and 4 months. Log-binomial regression evaluated HIVST preferences by venue. Among 315 reached, 87% enrolled. HIVST acceptance was higher in bars/clubs (94%) than homes (86%) or pharmacies (75%). HIVST completion was 97%, with one confirmed positive result. Participants wanted future HIVST at multiple locations, include PrEP, and cost ≤ $5USD. Participants from bars/clubs and pharmacies were more likely to prefer unassisted testing and peer-distributers compared to participants from homes. This differentiated community-based HIVST strategy could facilitate engagement in HIV testing and prevention among AYA.

Low costs and opportunities for efficiency: a cost analysis of the first year of programmatic PrEP delivery in Kenya's public sector.

BACKGROUND: In 2017, the Kenyan Ministry of Health integrated provision of pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) into public HIV-1 care clinics as a key component of the national HIV-1 prevention strategy. Estimates of the cost of PrEP provision are needed to inform the affordability and cost-effectiveness of PrEP in Kenya. METHODS: We conducted activity-based micro-costing from the payer perspective to estimate both the financial and economic costs of all resources and activities required to provide PrEP in Kenya's public sector. We estimated total and unit costs in 2019 United States dollars from a combination of project expense reports, Ministry of Health training reports, clinic staff interviews, time-and-motion observations, and routinely collected data from PrEP recipient files from 25 high-volume HIV-1 care clinics. RESULTS: In the first year of programmatic PrEP delivery in 25 HIV-1 care clinics, 2,567 persons initiated PrEP and accrued 8,847 total months of PrEP coverage, accounting for 2 % of total outpatient clinic visits. The total financial cost to the Ministry of Health was $91,175, translating to an average of $10.31 per person per month. The majority (69 %) of financial costs were attributable to PrEP medication, followed by administrative supplies (17 %) and training (9 %). Economic costs were higher ($188,584 total; $21.32 per person per month) due to the inclusion of the opportunity cost of staff time re-allocated to provide PrEP and a proportional fraction of facility overhead. The vast majority (88 %) of the annual $80,811 economic cost of personnel time was incurred during activities to recruit new clients (e.g., discussion of PrEP within HIV-1 testing and counselling services), while the remaining 12 % was for activities related to both initiation and maintenance of PrEP provision (e.g., client consultations, technical advising, support groups). CONCLUSIONS: Integration of PrEP provision into existing public health HIV-1 care service delivery platforms resulted in minimal additional staff burden and low incremental costs. Efforts to improve the efficiency of PrEP provision should focus on reductions in the cost of PrEP medication and extra-clinic demand creation and community sensitization to reduce personnel time dedicated to recruitment-related activities. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov registration NCT03052010 . Retrospectively registered on February 14, 2017.

Patient-reported outcomes for diabetes and hypertension care in low- and middle-income countries: A scoping review.

INTRODUCTION: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) assess patients' perspectives on their health status, providing opportunities to improve the quality of care. While PROMs are increasingly used in high-income settings, limited data are available on PROMs use for diabetes and hypertension in low-and middle-income countries (LMICs). This scoping review aimed to determine how PROMs are employed for diabetes and hypertension care in LMICs. METHODS: We searched PubMed, EMBASE, and ClinicalTrials.gov for English-language studies published between August 2009 and August 2019 that measured at least one PROM related to diabetes or hypertension in LMICs. Full texts of included studies were examined to assess study characteristics, target population, outcome focus, PROMs used, and methods for data collection and reporting. RESULTS: Sixty-eight studies met the inclusion criteria and reported on PROMs for people diagnosed with hypertension and/or diabetes and receiving care in health facilities. Thirty-nine (57%) reported on upper-middle-income countries, 19 (28%) reported on lower-middle-income countries, 4 (6%) reported on low-income countries, and 6 (9%) were multi-country. Most focused on diabetes (60/68, 88%), while 4 studies focused on hypertension and 4 focused on diabetes/hypertension comorbidity. Outcomes of interest varied; most common were glycemic or blood pressure control (38), health literacy and treatment adherence (27), and acute complications (22). Collectively the studies deployed 55 unique tools to measure patient outcomes. Most common were the Morisky Medication Adherence Scale (7) and EuroQoL-5D-3L (7). CONCLUSION: PROMs are deployed in LMICs around the world, with greatest reported use in LMICs with an upper-middle-income classification. Diabetes PROMs were more widely deployed in LMICs than hypertension PROMs, suggesting an opportunity to adapt PROMs for hypertension. Future research focusing on standardization and simplification could improve future comparability and adaptability across LMIC contexts. Incorporation into national health information systems would best establish PROMs as a means to reveal the effectiveness of person-centered diabetes and hypertension care.