Home-based HIV Testing for Children: A Useful Complement for Caregivers with More Children, Who are Male, and with an HIV Negative Partner.

Expanding index and family-based testing (HBT) is a priority for identifying children living with HIV. Our study characterizes predictors that drive testing location choice for children of parents living with HIV. Kenyan adults living with HIV were offered a choice of HBT or clinic-based testing (CBT) for any of their children (0-12 years) of unknown HIV status. Multilevel generalized linear models were used to identify correlates of choosing HBT or CBT for children and testing all versus some children within a family, including caregiver demographics, HIV history, social support, cost, and child demographics and HIV prevention history. Among 244 caregivers living with HIV and their children of unknown HIV status, most (72%) caregivers tested children using CBT. In multivariate analysis, female caregivers [aRR 0.52 (95% CI 0.34-0.80)] were less likely to choose HBT than male caregivers. Caregivers with more children requiring testing [aRR 1.23 (95% CI 1.05-1.44)] were more likely to choose HBT than those with fewer children requiring testing. In subgroup univariate analysis, female caregivers with a known HIV negative spouse were significantly more likely to choose HBT over CBT than those with a known HIV positive spouse [RR 2.57 (95% CI 1.28-5.14), p = 0.008], no association was found for male caregivers. Child demographics and clinical history was not associated with study outcomes. Caregiver-specific factors were more influential than child-specific factors in caregiver choice of pediatric HIV testing location. Home-based testing may be preferable to families with higher child care needs and may encourage pediatric HIV testing if offered as an alternative to clinic testing.

Financial Incentives for Pediatric HIV Testing (FIT): Caregiver Insights on Incentive Mechanisms, Focus Populations, and Acceptability for Programmatic Scale Up.

Children living with HIV experience gaps in HIV testing globally; scaling up evidence-based testing strategies is critical for preventing HIV-related mortality. Financial incentives (FI) were recently demonstrated to increase uptake of pediatric HIV testing. As part of this qualitative follow-up study to the FIT trial (NCT03049917) conducted in Kenya, 54 caregivers participated in individual interviews. Interview transcripts were analyzed to identify considerations for scaling up FI for pediatric testing. Caregivers reported that FI function by directly offsetting costs or nudging caregivers to take action sooner. Caregivers found FI to be feasible and acceptable for broader programmatic implementation, and supported use for a variety of populations. Some concerns were raised about unintended consequences of FI, including caregivers bringing ineligible children to collect incentives and fears about the impact on linkage to care and retention if caregivers become dependent on FI.

Brief Report: Pediatric Saliva-Based HIV Testing: Health care Worker and Caregiver Acceptability.

BACKGROUND: Pediatric HIV testing remains suboptimal. The OraQuick test [saliva-based test (SBT)] is validated in pediatric populations ≥18 months. Understanding caregiver and health care worker (HCW) acceptability of pediatric SBT is critical for implementation. METHODS: A trained qualitative interviewer conducted 8 focus group discussions (FGDs): 4 with HCWs and 4 with caregivers of children seeking health services in western Kenya. FGDs explored acceptability of pediatric SBT and home- and facility-based SBT use. Two reviewers conducted consensus coding and thematic analyses of transcripts using Dedoose. RESULTS: Most HCWs but few caregivers had heard of SBT. Before seeing SBT instructions, both had concerns about potential HIV transmission through saliva, which were mostly alleviated after kit demonstration. Noted benefits of SBT included usability and avoiding finger pricks. Benefits of facility-based pediatric SBT included shorter client waiting and service time, higher testing coverage, and access to HCWs, while noted challenges included ensuring confidentiality. Benefits of caregivers using home-based SBT included convenience, privacy, decreased travel costs, increased testing, easier administration, and child comfort. Perceived challenges included not receiving counseling, disagreements with partners, child neglect, and negative emotional response to a positive test result. Overall, HCWs felt that SBT could be used for pediatric HIV testing but saw limited utility for caregivers performing SBT without an HCW present. Caregivers saw utility in home-based SBT but wanted easy access to counseling in case of a positive test result. CONCLUSIONS: SBT was generally acceptable to HCWs and caregivers and is a promising strategy to expand testing coverage.

Financial incentives to increase pediatric HIV testing: a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Financial incentives can motivate desirable health behaviors, including adult HIV testing. Data regarding the effectiveness of financial incentives for HIV testing in children, who require urgent testing to prevent mortality, are lacking. METHODS: In a five-arm unblinded randomized controlled trial, adults living with HIV attending 19 HIV clinics in Western Kenya, with children 0-12 years of unknown HIV status, were randomized with equal allocation to $0, $1.25, $2.50, $5 or $10. Payment was conditional on child HIV testing within 2 months. Block randomization with fixed block sizes was used; participants and study staff were unblinded at randomization. Primary analysis was intent-to-treat, with predefined primary outcomes of completing child HIV testing and time to testing. RESULTS: Of 452 caregivers, 90, 89, 93, 92 and 88 were randomized to $0, $1.25, $2.50, $5.00, and $10.00, respectively. Of those, 31 (34%), 31 (35%), 44 (47%), 51 (55%), and 54 (61%) in the $0, $1.25, $2.50, $5.00, and $10.00 arms, respectively, completed child testing. Compared with the $0 arm, and adjusted for site, caregivers in the $10.00 arm had significantly higher uptake of testing [relative risk: 1.80 (95% CI 1.15--2.80), P = 0.010]. Compared with the $0 arm, and adjusted for site, time to testing was significantly faster in the $5.00 and $10.00 arms [hazard ratio: 1.95 (95% CI 1.24--3.07) P = 0.004, 2.42 (95% CI 1.55--3.79), P < 0.001, respectively). CONCLUSION: Financial incentives are effective in improving pediatric HIV testing among caregivers living with HIV. REGISTRATION: NCT03049917.

Brief Report: Use of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to Characterize Health Care Workers' Perspectives on Financial Incentives to Increase Pediatric HIV Testing.

BACKGROUND: A prior randomized control trial showed financial incentives increase HIV testing rates for children of unknown HIV status. Translating evidence-based interventions such as these to scale requires an implementation science approach. METHODS: A qualitative study evaluating health care providers' perceptions of barriers and facilitators of a previously completed financial incentives intervention for pediatric HIV testing was conducted at health care facilities in Kisumu, Kenya. Six focus group discussions with 52 providers explored determinants of acceptability, feasibility, and sustainability of financial incentive scale-up for pediatric HIV testing using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research to inform question guides and thematic analysis. RESULTS: Providers found the use of financial incentive interventions for pediatric HIV testing to be highly acceptable. First, providers believed financial incentives had a relative advantage over existing strategies, because they overcame cost barriers and provided additional motivation to test; however, concerns about how financial incentives would be implemented influenced perceptions of feasibility and sustainability. Second, providers expressed concern that already overburdened staff and high costs of financial incentive programs would limit sustainability. Third, providers feared that financial incentives may negatively affect further care because of expectations of repeated financial support and program manipulation. CONCLUSIONS: Providers viewed financial incentives as an acceptable intervention to scale programmatically to increase uptake of pediatric testing. To ensure feasibility and sustainability of financial incentives in pediatric HIV testing programs, it will be important to clearly define target populations, manage expectations of continued financial support, and establish systems to track testing.

Financial Incentives to Increase Uptake of Pediatric HIV Testing (FIT): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial in Kenya.

INTRODUCTION: Index case testing (ICT) to identify HIV-infected children is efficient but has suboptimal uptake. Financial incentives (FI) have overcome financial barriers in other populations by offsetting direct and indirect costs. A pilot study found FI to be feasible for motivating paediatric ICT among HIV-infected female caregivers. This randomised trial will determine the effectiveness of FI to increase uptake of paediatric ICT. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The Financial Incentives to Increase Uptake of Pediatric HIV Testing trial is a five-arm, unblinded, randomised controlled trial that determines whether FI increases timely uptake of paediatric ICT. The trial will be conducted in multiple public health facilities in western Kenya. Each HIV-infected adult enrolled in HIV care will be screened for eligibility: primary caregiver to one or more children of unknown HIV status aged 0-12 years. Eligible caregivers will be individually randomised at the time of recruitment in equal 1:1:1:1:1 allocation to one of five arms (US$0 (control), US$1.25, US$2.50, US$5.00 and US$10.00). The trial aims to randomise 800 caregivers. Incentives will be disbursed at the time of child HIV testing using mobile money transfer or cash. Arms will be compared in terms of the proportion of adults who complete testing for at least one child within 2 months of randomisation and time to testing. A cost-effectiveness analysis of FI for paediatric ICT will also be conducted. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study was reviewed and approved by the University of Washington Institutional Review Board and the Kenyatta National Hospital Ethics and Research Committee. Trial results will be disseminated to healthcare workers at study sites, regional and national policymakers, and with patient populations at study sites (regardless of enrolment in the trial). Randomised trials of caregiver-child FI interventions pose unique study design, ethical and operational challenges, detailed here as a resource for future investigations. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03049917; Pre-results.

Financial Incentives for Pediatric HIV Testing in Kenya.

The acceptability of financial incentives for pediatric HIV testing was evaluated in Kenya. Sixty HIV-positive women with children of unknown status were randomized to receive $5, $10 or $15 conditional upon HIV testing. Forty-four (73%) completed child testing, with similar rates across arms. Uptake was significantly higher than a cohort with similar procedures but no incentives (73% vs. 14%, P < 0.001).