Superior uptake and outcomes of early infant diagnosis of HIV services at an immunization clinic versus an "under-five" general pediatric clinic in Malawi.

OBJECTIVE: Although the Malawian government recommends HIV-exposed infants receive early infant diagnosis (EID) of HIV at "under-five" pediatric clinics (U5Cs), most never enroll. Therefore, we evaluated the integration of EID testing into an immunization clinic (IC) compared with the current standard of EID testing at an U5C. DESIGN: Prospective observational study. METHODS: Using routine provider-initiated HIV testing and counseling (PITC) registers, we prospectively studied 1757 children offered PITC at a government IC and U5C. Infants tested by HIV DNA polymerase chain reaction (PCR) were followed until PCR result disclosure or defaulting. RESULTS: We sampled 877 and 880 consecutive PITC recipients at U5C and IC, respectively. Overall, a 7-fold greater proportion received PITC at IC (84.2% vs. 11.4%, P < 0.001). PITC recipients at IC were more than 14 months younger (2.6 vs. 17.0, P < 0.001), with greater proportions HIV exposed (17.6% vs. 5.3%, P < 0.001) and PCR eligible (7.9% vs. 3.5%, P < 0.001). A higher percentage of IC infants accepted PCR testing (100.0% vs. 90.3%, P = 0.03). Additionally, IC PCR recipients were 2.5 months younger (3.1 vs. 5.6, P < 0.001) with 4 times less testing PCR positive (7.1% vs. 32.1%, P < 0.001). Importantly, a more than 3-fold greater proportion of HIV-exposed infants at IC returned for their PCR result and enrolled into care (78.6% vs. 25.0%, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with an U5C, integrating EID testing into an IC is more acceptable, more feasible, enrolls more infants into EID at younger ages, and would likely strengthen Malawi's EID services if expanded.

Routine inpatient human immunodeficiency virus testing system increases access to pediatric human immunodeficiency virus care in sub-Saharan Africa.

BACKGROUND: Routine Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) testing, called provider-initiated opt-out HIV testing and counseling (PITC), is recommended in African countries with high HIV prevalence. However, it is unknown whether PITC increases access to pediatric HIV care. In 2008, the Baylor International Pediatric AIDS Initiative implemented PITC (BIPAI-PITC) at a Malawian hospital. We sought to evaluate the influence of BIPAI-PITC, compared with nonroutine HIV testing (NRT), on pediatric HIV care access. METHODS: Retrospective data from 7077 pediatric inpatients were collected during sequential 4-month periods of NRT and BIPAI-PITC. In-hospital and 1-year outcomes for 337 HIV-infected and HIV-exposed uninfected inpatients not previously enrolled in HIV care were analyzed to assess the clinical influence of each testing strategy. RESULTS: During BIPAI-PITC, a greater proportion of all hospitalized children received HIV testing (81.0% vs. 33.3%, P < 0.001), accessed inpatient HIV-trained care (7.5% vs. 2.4%, P < 0.001), enrolled into an outpatient HIV clinic after discharge (3.2% vs. 1.3%, P < 0.001), and initiated antiretroviral therapy (ART) after hospitalization (1.1% vs. 0.6%, P = 0.010) compared with NRT. Additionally, BIPAI-PITC increased the proportion of hospitalized HIV-infected and HIV-exposed uninfected children receiving DNA polymerase chain reaction testing (73.5% vs. 35.2%, P < 0.001), but did not improve outpatient enrollment or ART initiation of identified HIV-infected patients. CONCLUSIONS: BIPAI-PITC increases access to inpatient and outpatient pediatric HIV care for hospitalized children, including DNA polymerase chain reaction testing and ART. Broader implementation of BIPAI-PITC or similar approaches, along with more pediatric HIV-trained clinicians and improved defaulter-tracking methods, would improve pediatric HIV service utilization globally.