HIV risk screening and HIV testing among orphans and vulnerable children in community settings in Tanzania: Acceptability and fidelity to lay-cadre administration of the screening tool.

IntroductionHIV risk screening tool validation studies have not typically included process evaluations to understand tool implementation. The study aim was to assess the fidelity to which an HIV risk screening tool was administered by lay workers and acceptability of delivering home-based screening coupled with HIV testing to beneficiaries in an orphans and vulnerable children (OVC) program.MethodsThis cross-sectional study was conducted March-April 2019 in two regions of Tanzania. Community case workers (CCW) were observed conducting screenings with OVC 2-19 years and participated in focus group discussions. Research staff used structured observation checklists to capture if screening questions were asked or reworded by CCW. In-depth interviews were conducted with older adolescents and caregivers in their homes following screening and testing. A composite score was developed for the checklist. Qualitative data were thematically analyzed to address screening and testing perceptions and experiences.ResultsCCW (n = 32) participated in 166 observations. Commonly skipped items were malnutrition (34% of all observed screenings) and sexual activity and pregnancy (20% and 45% of screenings for adolescents only). Items frequently re-worded included child abuse (22%) and malnutrition (15%). CCW had an average composite observation score of 42/50. CCW in focus groups (n = 34) found the screening process acceptable. However, they described rewording some questions viewed as harsh or socially inappropriate to ask. Overall, adolescent beneficiaries (n = 17) and caregivers (n = 25) were satisfied with home-based screening and testing and reported no negative consequences. Learning one's HIV negative status was seen as an opportunity to discuss or recommit to healthy behaviors. While respondents identified multiple benefits of home testing, they noted the potential for privacy breaches in household settings.ConclusionsWe found sub-optimal fidelity to the administration of the screening tool by CCW in home environments to children and adolescents enrolled in an OVC program. Improvements to questions and their delivery and ongoing mentorship could strengthen tool performance and HIV case finding using a targeted testing approach. Overall, home-based HIV risk screening and testing were acceptable to beneficiaries and CCW, could improve testing uptake, and serve as a platform to promote healthy behaviors for those with limited health system interactions

Balancing HIV testing efficiency with HIV case-identification among children and adolescents (2-19 years) using an HIV risk screening approach in Tanzania.

To optimize HIV testing resources, programs are moving away from universal testing strategies toward a risk-based screening approach to testing children/adolescents, but there is little consensus around what defines an optimal risk screening tool. This study aimed to validate a 12-item risk screening tool among children and adolescents and provide suggested fewer-item tool options for screening both facility out-patient and community populations by age strata (<10 and ≥10 years). Children/adolescents (2-19 years) with unknown HIV status were recruited from a community-based vulnerable children program and health facilities in 5 regions of Tanzania in 2019. Lay workers administered the screening questions to caregivers/adolescents; nurses enrolled those eligible for the study and tested all participants for HIV. For each screening item, we estimated sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value and associated 95% confidence intervals (CI). We generated a score based on the count of items with a positive risk response and fit a receiver operating characteristic curve to determine a cut-off score. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV; yield) and number needed to test to detect an HIV-positive child (NNT) were estimated for various tool options by age group. We enrolled 21,008 children and adolescents. The proportion of undiagnosed HIV-positive children was low (n = 76; 0.36%; CI:0.29,0.45%). A screening algorithm based on reporting at least one or more items on the 10 to 12-item tool had sensitivity 89.2% (CI:79.1,95.6), specificity 37.5% (CI:36.8,38.2), positive predictive value 0.5% (CI:0.4,0.6) and NNT = 211. An algorithm based on at least two or more items resulted in lower sensitivity (64.6%), improved specificity (69.1%), PPV (0.7%) and NNT = 145. A shorter tool derived from the 10 to 12-item screening tool with a score of "1" or more on the following items: relative died, ever hospitalized, cough, family member with HIV, and sexually active if 10-19 years performed optimally with 85.3% (CI:74.6,92.7) sensitivity, 44.2% (CI:43.5,44.9) specificity, 0.5% (CI:0.4,0.7) PPV and NNT = 193. We propose that different short-tool options (3-5 items) can achieve an optimal balance between reduced HIV testing costs (lower NNT) with acceptable sensitivity. In low prevalence settings, changes in yield may be negligible and NNT may remain high even for an effective tool