Using Participatory Mapping to Inform a Community-Randomized Trial of HIV Counseling and Testing

Participatory mapping and transect walks were used to inform the research and intervention design and to begin building community relations in preparation for Project Accept, a community-randomized trial sponsored by the U.S. National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH). NIMH Project Accept is being conducted in five sites within four countries including Thailand, Zimbabwe, South Africa and Tanzania. Results from the mapping exercises informed decisions about the research design such as defining community boundaries, and identifying appropriate criteria for matching community pairs for the trial. The mapping also informed intervention related decisions such as where to situate the services. The participatory methods enabled each site to develop an understanding of the communities that could not have been derived from existing data or data collected through standard data collection techniques. Furthermore, the methods lay the foundation for collaborative community research partnerships

A comparison of HIV stigma and discrimination in five international sites: The influence of care and treatment resources in high prevalence settings

What accounts for differences in HIV stigma across different high prevalence settings? This study was designed to examine HIV stigma and discrimination in five high prevalence settings. Qualitative data were collected as part of the US National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) Project Accept, a multi-site community randomized trial of community-based HIV voluntary counseling and testing. In-depth interviews were conducted with 655 participants in five sites, four in Sub-Saharan Africa and one in Southeast Asia. Interviews were conducted in the local languages by trained research staff. Data were audiotaped, transcribed, translated, coded and computerized for thematic data analysis. Participants described the stigmatizing attitudes and behaviors perpetuated against people living with HIV/AIDS (PLWHA). The factors that contribute to HIV stigma and discrimination include fear of transmission, fear of suffering and death, and the burden of caring for PLWHA. The family, access to antiretrovirals and other resources, and self-protective behaviors of PLWHA protected against HIV stigma and discrimination. Variation in the availability of health and socioeconomic resources designed to mitigate the impact of HIV/AIDS helps explain differences in HIV stigma and discrimination across the settings. Increasing access to treatment and care resources may function to lower HIV stigma, however providing services is not enough. We need effective strategies to reduce HIV stigma as treatment and care resources are scaled up in the settings that are most heavily impacted by the HIV epidemic

HIV Risk Behaviors in Sub-Saharan Africa and Northern Thailand: Baseline Behavioral Data From Project Accept

Of 2.5 million new HIV infections worldwide in 2007, most occurred in Sub-Saharan Africa and Southeast Asia. We present the baseline data on HIV risk behaviors and HIV testing in Sub-Saharan Africa and northern Thailand from Project Accept, a community-randomized controlled trial of community mobilization, mobile voluntary counseling and testing (VCT), and post-test support services

A comparison of HIV/AIDS-related stigma in four countries: Negative attitudes and perceived acts of discrimination towards people living with HIV/AIDS

HIV/AIDS-related stigma and discrimination have a substantial impact on people living with HIV/AIDS (PLHA). The objectives of this study were: (1) to determine the associations of two constructs of HIV/AIDS-related stigma and discrimination (negative attitudes towards PLHA and perceived acts of discrimination towards PLHA) with previous history of HIV testing, knowledge of antiretroviral therapies (ARVs) and communication regarding HIV/AIDS and (2) to compare these two constructs across the five research sites with respect to differing levels of HIV prevalence and ARV coverage, using data presented from the baseline survey of U.S. National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) Project Accept, a four-country HIV prevention trial in Sub-Saharan Africa (Tanzania, Zimbabwe and South Africa) and northern Thailand. A household probability sample of 14,203 participants completed a survey including a scale measuring HIV/AIDS-related stigma and discrimination. Logistic regression models determined the associations between negative attitudes and perceived discrimination with individual history of HIV testing, knowledge of ARVs and communication regarding HIV/AIDS. Spearman's correlation coefficients determined the relationships between negative attitudes and perceived discrimination and HIV prevalence and ARV coverage at the site-level. Negative attitudes were related to never having tested for HIV, lacking knowledge of ARVs, and never having discussed HIV/AIDS. More negative attitudes were found in sites with the lowest HIV prevalence (i.e., Tanzania and Thailand) and more perceived discrimination against PLHA was found in sites with the lowest ARV coverage (i.e., Tanzania and Zimbabwe). Programs that promote widespread HIV testing and discussion of HIV/AIDS, as well as education regarding and universal access to ARVs, may reduce HIV/AIDS-related stigma and discrimination

Health Diplomacy the Adaptation of Global Health Interventions to Local Needs in sub-Saharan Africa and Thailand: Evaluating Findings from Project Accept (HPTN 043).

Study-based global health interventions, especially those that are conducted on an international or multi-site basis, frequently require site-specific adaptations in order to (1) respond to socio-cultural differences in risk determinants, (2) to make interventions more relevant to target population needs, and (3) in recognition of 'global health diplomacy' issues. We report on the adaptations development, approval and implementation process from the Project Accept voluntary counseling and testing, community mobilization and post-test support services intervention. We reviewed all relevant documentation collected during the study intervention period (e.g. monthly progress reports; bi-annual steering committee presentations) and conducted a series of semi-structured interviews with project directors and between 12 and 23 field staff at each study site in South Africa, Zimbabwe, Thailand and Tanzania during 2009. Respondents were asked to describe (1) the adaptations development and approval process and (2) the most successful site-specific adaptations from the perspective of facilitating intervention implementation. Across sites, proposed adaptations were identified by field staff and submitted to project directors for review on a formally planned basis. The cross-site intervention sub-committee then ensured fidelity to the study protocol before approval. Successfully-implemented adaptations included: intervention delivery adaptations (e.g. development of tailored counseling messages for immigrant labour groups in South Africa) political, environmental and infrastructural adaptations (e.g. use of local community centers as VCT venues in Zimbabwe); religious adaptations (e.g. dividing clients by gender in Muslim areas of Tanzania); economic adaptations (e.g. co-provision of income generating skills classes in Zimbabwe); epidemiological adaptations (e.g. provision of 'youth-friendly' services in South Africa, Zimbabwe and Tanzania), and social adaptations (e.g. modification of terminology to local dialects in Thailand: and adjustment of service delivery schedules to suit seasonal and daily work schedules across sites). Adaptation selection, development and approval during multi-site global health research studies should be a planned process that maintains fidelity to the study protocol. The successful implementation of appropriate site-specific adaptations may have important implications for intervention implementation, from both a service uptake and a global health diplomacy perspective

Health diplomacy and Adapting global health interventions to local needs: findings from project accept (HPTN 043), a community-based intervention to reduce HIV incidence in populations at risk in Sub-Saharan Africa and Thailand

Abstract Background Study-based global health interventions, especially those that are conducted on an international or multi-site basis, frequently require site-specific adaptations in order to (1) respond to socio-cultural differences in risk determinants, (2) to make interventions more relevant to target population needs, and (3) in recognition of ‘global health diplomacy' issues. We report on the adaptations development, approval and implementation process from the Project Accept voluntary counseling and testing, community mobilization and post-test support services intervention. Methods We reviewed all relevant documentation collected during the study intervention period (e.g. monthly progress reports; bi-annual steering committee presentations) and conducted a series of semi-structured interviews with project directors and between 12 and 23 field staff at each study site in South Africa, Zimbabwe, Thailand and Tanzania during 2009. Respondents were asked to describe (1) the adaptations development and approval process and (2) the most successful site-specific adaptations from the perspective of facilitating intervention implementation. Results Across sites, proposed adaptations were identified by field staff and submitted to project directors for review on a formally planned basis. The cross-site intervention sub-committee then ensured fidelity to the study protocol before approval. Successfully-implemented adaptations included: intervention delivery adaptations (e.g. development of tailored counseling messages for immigrant labour groups in South Africa) political, environmental and infrastructural adaptations (e.g. use of local community centers as VCT venues in Zimbabwe); religious adaptations (e.g. dividing clients by gender in Muslim areas of Tanzania); economic adaptations (e.g. co-provision of income generating skills classes in Zimbabwe); epidemiological adaptations (e.g. provision of ‘youth-friendly’ services in South Africa, Zimbabwe and Tanzania), and social adaptations (e.g. modification of terminology to local dialects in Thailand: and adjustment of service delivery schedules to suit seasonal and daily work schedules across sites). Conclusions Adaptation selection, development and approval during multi-site global health research studies should be a planned process that maintains fidelity to the study protocol. The successful implementation of appropriate site-specific adaptations may have important implications for intervention implementation, from both a service uptake and a global health diplomacy perspective

A comparison of HIV stigma and discrimination in five international sites: The influence of care and treatment resources in high prevalence settings

What accounts for differences in HIV stigma across different high prevalence settings? This study was designed to examine HIV stigma and discrimination in five high prevalence settings. Qualitative data were collected as part of the U.S. National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) Project Accept, a multi-site community randomized trial of community-based HIV voluntary counseling and testing. In-depth interviews were conducted with 655 participants in five sites, four in Sub-Saharan Africa and one in Southeast Asia. Interviews were conducted in the local languages by trained research staff. Data were audiotaped, transcribed, translated, coded and computerized for thematic data analysis. Participants described the stigmatizing attitudes and behaviors perpetuated against people living with HIV/AIDS (PLWHA). The factors that contribute to HIV stigma and discrimination include fear of transmission, fear of suffering and death, and the burden of caring for PLWHA. The family, access to antiretrovirals and other resources, and self-protective behaviors of PLWHA protected against HIV stigma and discrimination. Variation in the availability of health and socioeconomic resources designed to mitigate the impact of HIV/AIDS helps explain differences in HIV stigma and discrimination across the settings. Increasing access to treatment and care resources may function to lower HIV stigma, however, providing services is not enough. We need effective strategies to reduce HIV stigma as treatment and care resources are scaled up in the settings that are most heavily impacted by the HIV epidemic.Sub-Saharan Africa Thailand HIV/AIDS Stigma Discrimination Tanzania Zimbabwe South Africa

Health diplomacy and the adaptation of global health interventions to local needs in sub-Saharan Africa and Thailand: evaluating findings from Project Accept (HPTN 043).

BACKGROUND: Study-based global health interventions, especially those that are conducted on an international or multi-site basis, frequently require site-specific adaptations in order to (1) respond to socio-cultural differences in risk determinants, (2) to make interventions more relevant to target population needs, and (3) in recognition of global health diplomacy issues. We report on the adaptations development, approval and implementation process from the Project Accept voluntary counseling and testing, community mobilization and post-test support services intervention. METHODS: We reviewed all relevant documentation collected during the study intervention period (e.g. monthly progress reports; bi-annual steering committee presentations) and conducted a series of semi-structured interviews with project directors and between 12 and 23 field staff at each study site in South Africa, Zimbabwe, Thailand and Tanzania during 2009. Respondents were asked to describe (1) the adaptations development and approval process and (2) the most successful site-specific adaptations from the perspective of facilitating intervention implementation. RESULTS: Across sites, proposed adaptations were identified by field staff and submitted to project directors for review on a formally planned basis. The cross-site intervention sub-committee then ensured fidelity to the study protocol before approval. Successfully-implemented adaptations included: intervention delivery adaptations (e.g. development of tailored counseling messages for immigrant labour groups in South Africa) political, environmental and infrastructural adaptations (e.g. use of local community centers as VCT venues in Zimbabwe); religious adaptations (e.g. dividing clients by gender in Muslim areas of Tanzania); economic adaptations (e.g. co-provision of income generating skills classes in Zimbabwe); epidemiological adaptations (e.g. provision of youth-friendly services in South Africa, Zimbabwe and Tanzania), and social adaptations (e.g. modification of terminology to local dialects in Thailand: and adjustment of service delivery schedules to suit seasonal and daily work schedules across sites). CONCLUSIONS: Adaptation selection, development and approval during multi-site global health research studies should be a planned process that maintains fidelity to the study protocol. The successful implementation of appropriate site-specific adaptations may have important implications for intervention implementation, from both a service uptake and a global health diplomacy perspective