Frequent Detection of Undiagnosed HIV Within Emergency Departments in Botswana.

ABSTRACT: Among 130,161 HIV testing records from unique individuals at 149 programmatic sites in Botswana, frequency of detecting undiagnosed HIV infection within emergency departments (EDs) was 4.7% (455/9695), 2-fold higher than other clinic-based HIV counseling and testing. Men and noncitizens less frequently initiated same-day antiretroviral therapy after testing HIV positive within emergency departments.

Intensified Assisted Partner Notification Implementation in Botswana Increased Partner Identification but Not HIV Case-Finding: Findings Highlight the Need for Improved Data Monitoring.

BACKGROUND: How to implement and monitor assisted partner services (APS) programs for HIV infection as they go to scale-up is uncertain. SETTING: Forty Botswana Ministry of Health clinics, 2018-2020. METHODS: We compared 2 APS implementation phases. During phase 1, training, supervision, and data collection were minimal; only newly diagnosed HIV-positive persons received APS, and APS recipients notified partners themselves or jointly with counselors. Phase 2 included the following: intensified training and supervision; APS provision to previously diagnosed, untreated persons; structured interview records; and counselors offering to notify partners directly. RESULTS: Five thousand one hundred seventy-five and 1265 newly diagnosed HIV-positive persons received APS in phases 1 and 2, respectively. Comparing the phases, program reach (percentage of newly diagnosed cases receiving APS) increased from 86% to 93%, the contact index (sex partners named per case) increased from 0.85 to 1.32, and the percentage of cases with an identified HIV-positive partner increased from 12.6% to 60% (P < 0.001, all outcomes). The testing index (partners tested per case) was higher in phase 1 (0.56 vs. 0.45, P = 0.05), whereas the case-finding index (partners testing HIV-positive per case) did not change (0.13 vs. 0.14, P = 0.50). Five hundred seventy-eight (76%) of 756 HIV-positive partners in phase 2 were previously diagnosed; cases identified only 15% of these partners as HIV-positive at their initial interview. CONCLUSIONS: APS scale-up increased reach, the contact index, and the identification of previously diagnosed sex partners but not HIV case-finding. Improved, more comprehensive data likely explain the absence of increased case-finding, highlighting the need for more comprehensive data collection.

HIV testing criteria to reduce testing volume and increase positivity in Botswana.

OBJECTIVE: We used data from a routine HIV testing program to develop risk scores to identify patients with undiagnosed HIV infection while reducing the number of total tests performed. DESIGN: Multivariate logistic regression. METHODS: We included demographic factors from HIV testing data collected in 134 Botswana Ministry of Health & Wellness facilities during two periods (1 October 2018- 19 August 2019 and 1 December 2019 to 30 March 2020). In period 2, the program collected additional demographic and risk factors. We randomly split each period into prediction/validation datasets and used multivariate logistic regression to identify factors associated with positivity; factors with adjusted odds ratios at least 1.5 were included in the risk score with weights equal to their coefficient. We applied a range of risk score cutoffs to validation datasets to determine tests averted, test positivity, positives missed, and costs averted. RESULTS: In period 1, three factors were significantly associated with HIV positivity (coefficients range 0.44-0.87). In period 2, 12 such factors were identified (coefficients range 0.44-1.37). In period 1, application of risk score cutoff at least 1.0 would result in 50% fewer tests performed and capture 61% of positives. In period 2, a cutoff at least 1.0 would result in 13% fewer tests and capture 96% of positives; a cutoff at least 2.0 would result in 40% fewer tests and capture 83% of positives. Costs averted ranged from 12.1 to 52.3%. CONCLUSION: Botswana's testing program could decrease testing volume but may delay diagnosis of some positive patients. Whether this trade-off is worthwhile depends on operational considerations, impact of testing volume on program costs, and implications of delayed diagnoses.