Efficiency in PrEP Delivery: Estimating the Annual Costs of Oral PrEP in Zimbabwe.

Although oral PrEP is highly effective at preventing HIV acquisition, optimizing continuation among beneficiaries is challenging in many settings. We estimated the costs of delivering oral PrEP to populations at risk of HIV in seven clinics in Zimbabwe. Full annual economic costs of oral PrEP initiations and continuation visits were estimated from the providers' perspective for a six-clinic NGO network and one government SGBV clinic in Zimbabwe (January-December 2018). Disaggregating costs of full initiation and incremental follow-up visits enabled modeling of the impact of duration of continuation on the cost per person-year ($pPY) on PrEP. 4677 people initiated oral PrEP, averaging 2.7 follow-up visits per person. Average cost per person initiated was $238 ($183-$302 across the NGO clinics; $86 in the government facility). The full cost per initiation visit, including central and direct costs, was $178, and the incremental cost per follow-up visit, capturing only additional resources used directly in the follow up visits, was $22. The average duration of continuation was 3.0 months, generating an average $pPY of $943, ranging from $839 among adolescent girls and young women to $1219 in men. Oral PrEP delivery costs varied substantially by scale of initiations and by duration of continuation and type of clinic. Extending the average oral PrEP continuation from 2.7 to 5 visits (about 6 months) would greatly improve service efficiency, cutting the $pPY by more than half.

Provider and female client economic costs of integrated sexual and reproductive health and HIV services in Zimbabwe.

A retrospective facility-based costing study was undertaken to estimate the comparative cost per visit of five integrated sexual and reproductive health and HIV (human immuno-deficiency virus) services (provider perspective) within five clinic sites. These five clinics were part of four service delivery models: Non-governmental-organisation (NGO) directly managed model (Chitungwiza and New Africa House sites), NGO partner managed site (Mutare site), private-public-partnership (PPP) model (Chitungwiza Profam Clinic), and NGO directly managed outreach (operating from New Africa House site. In addition client cost exit interviews (client perspective) were conducted among 856 female clients exiting integrated services at three of the sites. Our costing approach involved first a facility bottom-up costing exercise (February to April 2015), conducted to quantify and value each resource input required to provide individual SRH and HIV services. Secondly overhead financial expenditures were allocated top-down from central office to sites and then respective integrated service based on pre-defined allocation factors derived from both the site facility observations and programme data for the prior 12 months. Costs were assessed in 2015 United States dollars (USD). Costs were assessed for HIV testing and counselling, screening and treatment of sexually transmitted infections, tuberculosis screening with smear microscopy, family planning, and cervical cancer screening and treatment employing visual inspection with acetic acid and cervicography and cryotherapy. Variability in costs per visit was evident across the models being highest for cervical cancer screening and cryotherapy (range: US$6.98-US$49.66). HIV testing and counselling showed least variability (range; US$10.96-US$16.28). In general the PPP model offered integrated services at the lowest unit costs whereas the partner managed site was highest. Significant client costs remain despite availability of integrated sexual and reproductive health and HIV services free of charge in our Zimbabwe study setting. Situating services closer to communities, incentives, transport reimbursements, reducing waiting times and co-location of sexual and reproductive health and HIV services may help minimise impact of client costs.

HIV self-testing: breaking the barriers to uptake of testing among men and adolescents in sub-Saharan Africa, experiences from STAR demonstration projects in Malawi, Zambia and Zimbabwe.

INTRODUCTION: Social, structural and systems barriers inhibit uptake of HIV testing. HIV self-testing (HIVST) has shown promising uptake by otherwise underserved priority groups including men, young people and first-time testers. Here, we use characteristics of HIVST kit recipients to investigate delivery to these priority groups during HIVST scale-up in three African countries. METHODS: Kit distributors collected individual-level age, sex and testing history from all clients. These data were aggregated and analysed by country (Malawi, Zambia and Zimbabwe) for five distribution models: local community-based distributor (CBD: door-to-door, street and local venues), workplace distribution (WD), integration into HIV testing services (IHTS), or public health facilities (IPHF) and during demand creation for voluntary male medical circumcision (VMMC). Used kits were collected and re-read from CBD and IHTS recipients. RESULTS: Between May 2015 and July 2017, 628,705 HIVST kits were distributed in Malawi (172,830), Zambia (190,787) and Zimbabwe (265,091). Community-based models, the first to be established, accounted for 519,658 (82.7%) of kits distributed, with 275,419 (53.0%) used kits returned. Subsequent model diversification delivered 54,453 (8.7%) test-kits through IHTS, 23,561 (3.7%) through VMMC, 21,183 (3.4%) through IPHF and 9850 (1.7%) through WD. Men took 294,508 (48.2%) kits, and 263,073 (43.1%) went to young people (16 to 24 years). A higher proportion of male self-testers (65,577; 22.3%) were first-time testers than women (54,096; 17.1%) with this apparent in Zimbabwe (16.2% vs. 11.4%), Zambia (25.4% vs. 17.7%) and Malawi (27.9% vs. 25.9%). The highest proportions of first-time testers were in young (16 to 24 years) and older (>50 years) men (country-ranges: 18.7% to 35.9% and 13.8% to 26.8% respectively). Most IHTS clients opted for HIVST in preference to standard HTS in each of 12 delivery sites, with those selecting HIVST having lower HIV prevalence, potentially due to self-selection. CONCLUSIONS: HIVST delivered at scale using several different models reached a high proportion of men, young people and first-time testers in Malawi, Zambia and Zimbabwe, some of whom may not have tested otherwise. As men and young people have limited uptake under standard facility-and community-based HIV testing, innovative male- and youth-sensitive approaches like HIVST may be essential to reaching UNAIDS fast-track targets for 2020.

Effect of non-monetary incentives on uptake of couples' counselling and testing among clients attending mobile HIV services in rural Zimbabwe: a cluster-randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Couples' HIV testing and counselling (CHTC) is associated with greater engagement with HIV prevention and care than individual testing and is cost-effective, but uptake remains suboptimal. Initiating discussion of CHTC might result in distrust between partners. Offering incentives for CHTC could change the focus of the pre-test discussion. We aimed to determine the impact of incentives for CHTC on uptake of couples testing and HIV case diagnosis in rural Zimbabwe. METHODS: In this cluster-randomised trial, 68 rural communities (the clusters) in four districts receiving mobile HIV testing services were randomly assigned (1:1) to incentives for CHTC or not. Allocation was not masked to participants and researchers. Randomisation was stratified by district and proximity to a health facility. Within each stratum random permutation was done to allocate clusters to the study groups. In intervention communities, residents were informed that couples who tested together could select one of three grocery items worth US$1·50. Standard mobilisation for testing was done in comparison communities. The primary outcome was the proportion of individuals testing with a partner. Analysis was by intention to treat. 3 months after CHTC, couple-testers from four communities per group individually completed a telephone survey to evaluate any social harms resulting from incentives or CHTC. The effect of incentives on CHTC was estimated using logistic regression with random effects adjusting for clustering. The trial was registered with the Pan African Clinical Trial Registry, number PACTR201606001630356. FINDINGS: From May 26, 2015, to Jan 29, 2016, of 24 679 participants counselled with data recorded, 14 099 (57·1%) were in the intervention group and 10 580 (42·9%) in the comparison group. 7852 (55·7%) testers in the intervention group versus 1062 (10·0%) in the comparison group tested with a partner (adjusted odds ratio 13·5 [95% CI 10·5-17·4]). Among 427 (83·7%) of 510 eligible participants who completed the telephone survey, 11 (2·6%) reported that they were pressured or themselves pressured their partner to test together; none regretted couples' testing. Relationship unrest was reported by eight individuals (1·9%), although none attributed this to incentives. INTERPRETATION: Small non-monetary incentives, which are potentially scalable, were associated with significantly increased CHTC and HIV case diagnosis. Incentives did not increase social harms beyond the few typically encountered with CHTC without incentives. The intervention could help achieve UNAIDS 90-90-90 targets. FUNDING: The study was funded by the UK Department for International Development, Irish AID, and Swedish SIDA, through Population Services International Zimbabwe under the Integrated Support Program.

Evaluation of the PIMA point-of-care CD4 analyzer in VCT clinics in Zimbabwe.

Point-of-care (POC) CD4 testing was implemented at a stand-alone HIV voluntary testing and counseling centre in Harare, Zimbabwe. To validate the use of this new technology, paired blood samples were collected from 165 patients either by a nurse or a laboratory technician and tested using POC and conventional laboratory CD4 machines. Finger prick (capillary) blood was collected directly into the PIMA POC CD4 Analyzer cartridges and tested immediately, whereas venous blood collected into evacuated tubes was used for CD4 enumeration on a Becton Dickinson FACSCalibur. There was no significant difference in mean absolute CD4 counts between the POC PIMA and Becton Dickinson FACSCalibur platforms (+7.6 cells/microL; P = 0.72). Additionally, there was no significant difference in CD4 counts between the platforms when run by either a nurse (+18.0 cells/microL; P = 0.49), or a laboratory technicians (-3.1 cells/microL; P = 0.93). This study demonstrates that POC CD4 testing can be conducted in a voluntary testing and counseling setting for staging HIV-positive clients. Both nurses and laboratory technicians performed the test accurately, thereby increasing the human resources available for POC CD4 testing. By producing same-day results, POC CD4 facilitates immediate decision-making, patient management and referral and may help improve patient care and retention. POC CD4 may also alleviate testing burdens at traditional central CD4 laboratories, hence improving test access in both rural and urban environments.