Implementing a pilot study of COVID-19 self-testing in high-risk populations and remote locations: results and lessons learnt.

BACKGROUND: Rapid antigen-detection tests for SARS-CoV-2 self-testing represent a useful tool for pandemic control and expanding access to community-level case screening. COVID-19 self-tests have been extensively used in high-income countries since 2021; however, their introduction and programmatic implementation in low- and middle-income countries was delayed. We aimed to identify and continuously improve a weekly COVID-19 self-testing model among staff at healthcare facilities and schools. METHODS: This mixed-methods, observational prospective study was conducted in 5 healthcare centres and 24 schools in Georgia, between June and December 2022. The study comprised the integration of COVID-19 self-testing into the national mandatory testing programme for high-risk groups, with primary distribution of self-tests among staff performed weekly, plus secondary distribution to their household members. These use cases were selected because NCDC was seeking to strengthen their already strong weekly testing programme, by investigating self-testing to ease the burden of testing in the healthcare system. Online surveys and semi-structured interviews were used for data collection. RESULTS: In total, 2156 participants were enrolled (1963 female, 72%). At baseline and mid- and end-points, 88%, 97% and 99%, respectively, of participants agreed/strongly agreed they would self-test. Similarly, the majority were willing to report their self-testing results (88%, 98% and 96% at baseline and mid- and end-points, respectively). Weekly reporting of test results to the national COVID-19 database was high during all the implementation. There were 622 COVID-19 positive results reported, and linked to care, from 601 individuals (282 participants and 319 household members). Findings from qualitative interviews showed great satisfaction with self-testing for its convenience, ease of use, trust in the results, no need to travel for diagnostics, and increased perception of safety. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings contribute to the evidence-base regarding self-testing strategies conducted via workplaces and secondary distribution to households. Willingness to perform a COVID-19 self-test increased after implementation. This pilot enhanced pandemic preparedness through expansion of the national self-testing reporting system, development of communications materials, changes in the national legal framework and coordination mechanisms, and improved perceptions around self-care in the community. The lessons learnt can inform operational aspects of the introduction and scale-up of self-care strategies.

Feasibility and effectiveness of HCV viraemia testing at harm reduction sites in Georgia: A prospective three-arm study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: In 2015, Georgia began a hepatitis C virus (HCV) elimination programme. Although screening programmes have been decentralized for high-risk groups, viraemic testing remains a bottleneck for people who inject drugs. Here, we describe two models of viraemic testing that aimed to address this gap. METHODS: We assigned eight harm reduction sites (HRS) to one of three arms (2,1:1): Xpert HCV viral load testing on-site, blood draw on-site with centralized HCV core antigen testing (HCVcAg), or standard-of-care (SOC) referral with viremia testing performed at treatment centres. RESULTS: 1671 HCV-seropositive participants were enrolled (Xpert, 37.1%; HCVcAg, 29.1%; referral, 33.8%). Participants were predominantly male (95.4%), mean age (IQR) 43 (37, 50) years and 1290 (77.2%) were currently injecting drugs. Significantly higher proportions of participants in the Xpert (100%) and HCVcAg (99.8%) arms received viraemia testing compared with the referral arm (91.3%) (Xpert vs referral, p < 0.0001; HCVcAg vs referral, p < 0.0001). Among viraemic participants, treatment uptake was similar (Xpert, 84.0%; HCVcAg, 79.5%; referral, 88.4%). The time between screening and sample collection for viraemia testing was significantly longer in the referral arm compared with both Xpert and HCVcAg arms (median 1 day compared with 0 days respectively), and the overall time between screening to treatment initiation was longer for the referral arm (median 67 days) compared with both Xpert and HCVcAg arms (median 57 and 50 days respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Point-of-care viraemia testing and blood drawn on-site for HCVcAg testing yielded more HCV-seropositive patients receiving viraemic testing within a shorter timeframe compared with referrals.

Home-based hepatitis C self-testing in people who inject drugs and men who have sex with men in Georgia: a protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Globally, it is estimated that more than three-quarters of people with chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) are unaware of their HCV status. HCV self-testing (HCVST) may improve access and uptake of HCV testing particularly among key populations such as people who inject drugs (PWID) and men who have sex with men (MSM) where HCV prevalence and incidence are high and barriers to accessing health services due to stigma and discrimination are common. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This randomised controlled trial compares an online programme offering oral fluid-based HCVST delivered to the home with referral to standard-of-care HCV testing at HCV testing sites. Eligible participants are adults self-identifying as either MSM or PWID who live in Tbilisi or Batumi, Georgia, and whose current HCV status is unknown. Participants will be recruited through an online platform and randomised to one of three arms for MSM (courier delivery, peer delivery and standard-of-care HCV testing (control)) and two for PWID (peer delivery and standard-of-care HCV testing (control)). Participants in the postal delivery group will receive an HCVST kit delivered by an anonymised courier. Participants in the peer delivery groups will schedule delivery of the HCVST by a peer. Control groups will receive information on how to access standard-of-care testing at a testing site. The primary outcome is the number and proportion of participants who report completion of testing. Secondary outcomes include the number and proportion of participants who (a) receive a positive result and are made aware of their status, (b) are referred to and complete HCV RNA confirmatory testing, and (c) start treatment. Acceptability, feasibility, and attitudes around HCV testing and cost will also be evaluated. The target sample size is 1250 participants (250 per arm). ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval has been obtained from the National Centers for Disease Control and Public Health Georgia Institutional Review Board (IRB) (IRB# 2021-049). Study results will be disseminated by presentations at conferences and via peer-reviewed journals. Protocol version 1.1; 14 July 2021. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov Registry (NCT04961723).

Integration of hepatitis C treatment at harm reduction centers in Georgia-Findings from a patient satisfaction survey.

BACKGROUND: Georgia launched national HCV elimination program in 2015. PWID may experience barriers to accessing HCV care. To improve linkage to care among PWID, pilot program to integrate HCV treatment with HR services at opiate substitution therapy (OST) centers and needle syringe program (NSP) sites was initiated. Our study aimed to assess satisfaction of patients with integrated HCV treatment services at HR centers. METHODS: Survey was conducted among convenience sample of patients receiving HCV treatment at 5 integrated care sites and 4 specialized clinics not providing HR services. Simplified pre-treatment diagnostic algorithm and treatment monitoring procedure was introduced for HCV treatment programs at OST/NSP centers which includes fewer pre-treatment and monitoring tests compared to standard algorithm. RESULTS: In total, 358 patients participated in the survey - 48.6% receiving HCV treatment at the specialized clinics while 51.4% at HR site with integrated treatment. Similar proportions of surveyed patients at HR sites (88.0%) and clinics (84.5%) stated that they did not face any barriers to enrollment in the elimination program. Most patients from HR pilot sites and specialized clinics stated that they received comprehensive information about the treatment (98.4% vs 94.3%; p<0.010). 95% of respondents at both sites were confident that confidentiality was completely protected during treatment. Higher proportion of patients at pilot sites thought that HCV treatment services provided at facility were good compared to those from the specialized clinics (85.3% vs 81.0%). We found significant difference in the time to treatment, measured as average time from viremia testing to administration of first dose of HCV medication: 42.9% of patients at pilot sites vs 4.6% at specialized clinics received the first dose of medication within two weeks. CONCLUSION: Quality of services and perceived satisfaction of patients receiving treatment, suggests that integration of HCV treatment with HR services is feasible.

Progress in Testing for and Treatment of Hepatitis C Virus Infection Among Persons Who Inject Drugs - Georgia, 2018.

In April 2015, the country of Georgia, with a high prevalence of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection (5.4% of the adult population, approximately 150,000 persons), embarked on the world's first national elimination program (1,2). Nearly 40% of these infections are attributed to injection drug use, and an estimated 2% of the adult population currently inject drugs, among the highest prevalence of injection drug use in the world (3,4). Since 2006, needle and syringe programs (NSPs) have been offering HCV antibody testing to persons who inject drugs and, since 2015, referring clients with positive test results to the national treatment program. This report summarizes the results of these efforts. Following implementation of the elimination program, the number of HCV antibody tests conducted at NSPs increased from an average of 3,638 per year during 2006-2014 to an average of 21,551 during 2015-2018. In 2017, to enable tracking of clinical outcomes among persons who inject drugs, NSPs began encouraging clients to voluntarily provide their national identification number (NIN), which all citizens must use to access health care treatment services. During 2017-2018, a total of 2,780 NSP clients with positive test results for HCV antibody were identified in the treatment database by their NIN. Of 494 who completed treatment and were tested for HCV RNA ≥12 weeks after completing treatment, 482 (97.6%) were cured of HCV infection. Following the launch of the elimination program, Georgia has made much progress in hepatitis C screening among persons who inject drugs; recent data demonstrate high cure rates achieved in this population. Testing at NSPs is an effective strategy for identifying persons with HCV infection. Tracking clients referred from NSPs through treatment completion allows for monitoring the effectiveness of linkage to care and treatment outcomes in this population at high risk, a key to achieving hepatitis C elimination in Georgia. The program in Georgia might serve as a model for other countries.

An evaluation of the hepatitis C testing, care and treatment program in the country of Georgia's corrections system, December 2013 - April 2015.

BACKGROUND: The country of Georgia has a high burden of chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection, and prisoners are disproportionately affected. During 2013, a novel program offering no cost screening and treatment of HCV infection for eligible prisoners was launched. METHODS: The HCV treatment program implemented a voluntary opt-in anti-HCV testing policy to all prisoners. Anti-HCV positive persons received HCV RNA and genotype testing. Transient elastography was also performed on prisoners with positive HCV RNA results. Prisoners with chronic HCV infection who had ≥F2 Metavir stage for liver fibrosis and a prison sentence ≥ 6 months were eligible for interferon-based treatment, which was the standard treatment prior to 2015. We conducted an evaluation of the HCV treatment program among prisoners from the program's inception in December 2013 through April 2015 by combining data from personal interviews with corrections staff, prisoner data in the corrections database, and HCV-specific laboratory information. RESULTS: Of an estimated 30,000 prisoners who were incarcerated at some time during the evaluation period, an estimated 13,500 (45%) received anti-HCV screening, of whom 5175 (38%) tested positive. Of these, 3840 (74%) received HCV RNA testing, 2730 (71%) tested positive, and 880 (32%) met treatment eligibility. Of these, 585 (66%) enrolled; 405 (69%) completed treatment, and 202 (50%) achieved a sustained virologic response at least 12 weeks after treatment completion. CONCLUSIONS: HCV infection prevalence among Georgian prisoners was high. Despite challenges, we determined HCV treatment within Georgian Ministry of Correction facilities was feasible. Efforts to address HCV infection among prison population is one important component of HCV elimination in Georgia.