HIV self-testing in India: implementation and qualitative evaluation of a web-based programme with virtual counsellor support.

INTRODUCTION: To achieve epidemic control of infectious diseases, engaging higher-burden populations with accessible diagnostic services is critical. HIV self-testing (HIVST) is a promising option. METHODS: We implemented an online HIVST programme for key populations across India. Eligible clients were 18 years or older, self-reported a negative or unknown HIV status and reported not taking antiretroviral therapy. Clients who reported a prior HIV diagnosis were not eligible to receive an HIVST kit. HIVST clients received kits via courier or in person at pre-determined pick-up points supported by trained counselling staff. Virtual counsellors engaged clients online and by phone and offered support to register, access, and complete HIVST free of cost. Virtual counsellors supported clients to report results and engage with follow-up services. Follow-up included linking clients with a positive result to confirmatory testing and HIV care services. We assessed programmatic data across HIV continuum outcomes and conducted a qualitative evaluation through interviews with purposively sampled clients. RESULTS: Between 30 June 2021 and 30 September 2022, 5324 clients ordered an HIVST kit (76% men, 13% women, 7% transgender people, 4% unknown gender). Of the 4282 clients reporting results (94% of those who received a kit), 6% screened positive, among whom 72% (n = 184) completed confirmatory testing. Themes from 41 client interviews included satisfaction about the convenience and privacy of services and the discreet nature of kit delivery. Respondents were drawn to the convenience of HIVST and appreciated gaining courage and comfort throughout the process from virtual counsellor support. For respondents who screened positive, challenges to care linkage included fearing judgemental questions from public providers and wanting more time before starting treatment. Clients shared concerns about kit accuracy and suggested that instructional materials be provided with more diverse language options. CONCLUSIONS: Web-based HIVST services with tailored support appeared to facilitate HIV service access and engagement of harder-to-reach populations across India. Assistance from a community-oriented counsellor proved important to overcome literacy barriers and mistrust  in order to support the HIVST process and service linkage. Learnings can inform global efforts to improve the critical step of diagnosis in achieving epidemic control for HIV and other infectious diseases.

HIV-1 low-level viraemia predicts virological failure in first-line and second-line ART-experienced individuals in India: A retrospective longitudinal study.

OBJECTIVE: To study the prevalence of low-level viraemia (LLV) and its association with virological failure (VF). METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of 3498 participants at YRG CARE, Chennai, India (2013-2018) on antiretroviral therapy (ART) for ≥6 months with two or more plasma viral load (pVL) measurements. Results were stratified for those with pVL <1000 copies/mL: fully suppressed (FS) (pVL <40), low-LLV (pVL 40-199), mid-LLV (pVL 200-399), and high-LLV (pVL 400-999). The study assessed the association with VF (pVL >1000 copies/mL) using Cox proportional hazard model. RESULTS: Among 3498 participants, 2965 (84.8%) were FS and 533 (15.2%) were LLV. During the follow-up, 348 (10%) experienced VF, with 222 (6.3%) experienced after LLV (42% of LLV) and 126 (3.6%) experienced after FS (4.3% of FS). When compared with FS, those with LLV had a greater risk of VF [adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) = 12.7; 95% confidence interval (CI): 10.2-15.9]. First-line participants had a higher VF incidence (aHR = 15.8, 95% CI: 11.4-21.9) than second-line participants (aHR = 5.6, 95% CI: 4.1-7.7). Those with high-LLV had the highest VF risk (aHR = 22.856, 95% CI: 15.204-34.359 vs. aHR = 8.186, 95% CI: 5.564-12.043, for first-line vs. second-line participants, respectively), followed by those with mid-LLV (aHR = 13.375, 95% CI: 8.327-21.483 vs. aHR = 6.261, 95% CI: 4.044-9.695) and low-LLV (aHR = 12.976, 95% CI: 7.974-21.118 vs. aHR = 4.158, 95% CI: 2.826-6.119). CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of LLV was intermediate in our study population. There was a higher risk of VF among individuals with LLV, and this risk increased with the increasing levels of LLV. Close monitoring of individuals experiencing LLV could help in the early identification of VF.