11 research outputs found

    Individual and community-level risk factors for HIV stigma in 21 Zambian and South African communities: analysis of data from the HPTN071 (PopART) study.

    Get PDF
    OBJECTIVE: To describe the prevalence and determinants of HIV stigma in 21 communities in Zambia and South Africa. DESIGN: Analysis of baseline data from the HPTN 071 (PopART) cluster-randomized trial. HIV stigma data came from a random sample of 3859 people living with HIV. Community-level exposures reflecting HIV fears and judgements and perceptions of HIV stigma came from a random sample of community members not living with HIV (n = 5088), and from health workers (HW) (n = 851). METHODS: We calculated the prevalence of internalized stigma, and stigma experienced in the community or in a healthcare setting in the past year. We conducted risk-factor analyses using logistic regression, adjusting for clustering. RESULTS: Internalized stigma (868/3859, prevalence 22.5%) was not associated with sociodemographic characteristics but was less common among those with a longer period since diagnosis (P = 0.043). Stigma experienced in the community (853/3859, 22.1%) was more common among women (P = 0.016), older (P = 0.011) and unmarried (P = 0.009) individuals, those who had disclosed to others (P < 0.001), and those with more lifetime sexual partners (P < 0.001). Stigma experienced in a healthcare setting (280/3859, 7.3%) was more common among women (P = 0.019) and those reporting more lifetime sexual partners (P = 0.001) and higher wealth (P = 0.003). Experienced stigma was more common in clusters wherever community members perceived higher levels of stigma, but was not associated with the beliefs of community members or HW. CONCLUSION: HIV stigma remains unacceptably high in South Africa and Zambia and may act as barrier to HIV prevention and treatment. Further research is needed to understand its determinants

    Development of parallel measures to assess HIV stigma and discrimination among people living with HIV, community members and health workers in the HPTN 071 (PopART) trial in Zambia and South Africa.

    Get PDF
    INTRODUCTION: Integrating standardized measures of HIV stigma and discrimination into research studies of emerging HIV prevention approaches could enhance uptake and retention of these approaches, and care and treatment for people living with HIV (PLHIV), by informing stigma mitigation strategies. We sought to develop a succinct set of measures to capture key domains of stigma for use in research on HIV prevention technologies. METHODS: From 2013 to 2015, we collected baseline data on HIV stigma from three populations (PLHIV (N = 4053), community members (N = 5782) and health workers (N = 1560)) in 21 study communities in South Africa and Zambia participating in the HPTN 071 (PopART) cluster-randomized trial. Forty questions were adapted from a harmonized set of measures developed in a consultative, global process. Informed by theory and factor analysis, we developed seven scales, with values ranging from 0 to 3, based on a 4-point agreement Likert, and calculated means to assess different aspects of stigma. Higher means reflected more stigma. We developed two measures capturing percentages of PLHIV who reported experiencing any stigma in communities or healthcare settings in the past 12 months. We validated our measures by examining reliability using Cronbach's alpha and comparing the distribution of responses across characteristics previously associated with HIV stigma. RESULTS: Thirty-five questions ultimately contributed to seven scales and two experience measures. All scales demonstrated acceptable to very good internal consistency. Among PLHIV, a scale captured internalized stigma, and experience measures demonstrated that 22.0% of PLHIV experienced stigma in the community and 7.1% in healthcare settings. Three scales for community members assessed fear and judgement, perceived stigma in the community and perceived stigma in healthcare settings. Similarly, health worker scales assessed fear and judgement, perceived stigma in the community and perceived co-worker stigma in healthcare settings. A higher proportion of community members and health workers reported perceived stigma than the proportion of PLHIV who reported experiences of stigma. CONCLUSIONS: We developed novel, valid measures that allowed for triangulation of HIV stigma across three populations in a large-scale study. Such comparisons will illuminate how stigma influences and is influenced by programmatic changes to HIV service delivery over time

    Identifying community risk factors for HIV among South African adolescents with mental health problems: A qualitative study of parental perceptions

    No full text
    High risk sexual behaviour, alcohol and drug use, and mental health problems combine to yield high levels of HIV-risk behaviour among adolescents with mental health problems. In South Africa, little research has been conducted on parental perspectives of HIV-risk among this population. We conducted a series of focus group discussions with 28 mothers of adolescents receiving services at two mental health clinics in South Africa to identify, from their perspectives, the key community problems facing their children. Participants indicated that HIV remained a serious threat to their adolescent children’s well-being, in addition to substance abuse, early sexual debut, and teenage pregnancy. These social problems were mentioned as external to their household dynamics, and thus seemingly beyond the purview of the parent–adolescent relationship. These data have implications for the design of family-based interventions to ameliorate the factors associated with HIV-risk among youth receiving mental health services.Journal of Child and Adolescent Mental Health 2014, 26(3): 165–17

    Tuberculosis prevalence after 4 years of population-wide systematic TB symptom screening and universal testing and treatment for HIV in the HPTN 071 (PopART) community-randomised trial in Zambia and South Africa: A cross-sectional survey (TREATS).

    No full text
    BackgroundTuberculosis (TB) prevalence remains persistently high in many settings, with new or expanded interventions required to achieve substantial reductions. The HIV Prevention Trials Network (HPTN) 071 (PopART) community-randomised trial randomised 14 communities to receive the "PopART" intervention during 2014 to 2017 (7 arm A and 7 arm B communities) and 7 communities to receive standard-of-care (arm C). The intervention was delivered door-to-door by community HIV care providers (CHiPs) and included universal HIV testing, facilitated linkage to HIV care at government health clinics, and systematic TB symptom screening. The Tuberculosis Reduction through Expanded Anti-retroviral Treatment and Screening (TREATS) study aimed to measure the impact of delivering the PopART intervention on TB outcomes, in communities with high HIV and TB prevalence.Methods and findingsThe study population of the HPTN 071 (PopART) trial included individuals aged ≥15 years living in 21 urban and peri-urban communities in Zambia and South Africa, with a total population of approximately 1 million and an adult HIV prevalence of around 15% at the time of the trial. Two sputum samples for TB testing were provided to CHiPs by individuals who reported ≥1 TB suggestive symptom (a cough for ≥2 weeks, unintentional weight loss ≥1.5 kg in the last month, or current night sweats) or that a household member was currently on TB treatment. Antiretroviral therapy (ART) was offered universally at clinics in arm A and according to local guidelines in arms B and C. The TREATS study was conducted in the same 21 communities as the HPTN 071 (PopART) trial between 2017 and 2022, and TB prevalence was a co-primary endpoint of the TREATS study. The primary comparison was between the PopART intervention (arms A and B combined) and the standard-of-care (arm C). During 2019 to 2021, a TB prevalence survey was conducted among randomly selected individuals aged ≥15 years (approximately 1,750 per community in arms A and B, approximately 3,500 in arm C). Participants were screened on TB symptoms and chest X-ray, with diagnostic testing using Xpert-Ultra followed by culture for individuals who screened positive. Sputum eligibility was determined by the presence of a cough for ≥2 weeks, or ≥2 of 5 "TB suggestive" symptoms (cough, weight loss for ≥4 weeks, night sweats, chest pain, and fever for ≥2 weeks), or chest X-ray CAD4TBv5 score ≥50, or no available X-ray results. TB prevalence was compared between trial arms using standard methods for cluster-randomised trials, with adjustment for age, sex, and HIV status, and multiple imputation was used for missing data on prevalent TB. Among 83,092 individuals who were eligible for the survey, 49,556 (59.6%) participated, 8,083 (16.3%) screened positive, 90.8% (7,336/8,083) provided 2 sputum samples for Xpert-Ultra testing, and 308 (4.2%) required culture confirmation. Overall, estimated TB prevalence was 0.92% (457/49,556). The geometric means of 7 community-level prevalence estimates were 0.91%, 0.70%, and 0.69% in arms A, B, and C, respectively, with no evidence of a difference comparing arms A and B combined with arm C (adjusted prevalence ratio 1.14, 95% confidence interval, CI [0.67, 1.95], p = 0.60). TB prevalence was higher among people living with HIV than HIV-negative individuals, with an age-sex-community adjusted odds ratio of 2.29 [95% CI 1.54, 3.41] in Zambian communities and 1.61 [95% CI 1.13, 2.30] in South African communities. The primary limitations are that the study was powered to detect only large reductions in TB prevalence in the intervention arm compared with standard-of-care, and the between-community variation in TB prevalence was larger than anticipated.ConclusionsThere was no evidence that the PopART intervention reduced TB prevalence. Systematic screening for TB that is based on symptom screening alone may not be sufficient to achieve a large reduction in TB prevalence over a period of several years. Including chest X-ray screening alongside TB symptom screening could substantially increase the sensitivity of systematic screening for TB.Trial registrationThe TREATS study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03739736 on November 14, 2018. The HPTN 071 (PopART) trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov under number NCT01900977 on July 17, 2013

    Optimising Xpert-Ultra and culture testing to reliably measure tuberculosis prevalence in the community: findings from surveys in Zambia and South Africa

    Get PDF
    Objectives: Prevalence surveys remain the best way to assess the national tuberculosis (TB) burden in many countries. Challenges with using culture (the reference standard) for TB diagnosis in prevalence surveys have led to increasing use of molecular tests (Xpert assays), but discordance between these two tests has created problems for deciding which individuals have TB. We aimed to design an accurate diagnostic algorithm for TB prevalence surveys (TBPS) that limits the use of culture. Design: TBPS in four communities, conducted during 2019. Setting: Three Zambian communities and one South-African community included in the TBPS of the Tuberculosis Reduction through Expanded Anti-retroviral Treatment and Screening study. Participants: Randomly sampled individuals aged ≥15 years. Among those who screened positive on chest X-ray or symptoms, two sputum samples were collected for field Xpert-Ultra testing and a third for laboratory liquid-culture testing. Clinicians reviewed screening and test results; in Zambia, participants with Mycobacterium tuberculosis-positive results were followed up 6–13 months later. Among 10 984 participants, 2092 screened positive, 1852 provided two samples for Xpert-Ultra testing, and 1009 had valid culture results. Outcomes: Culture and Xpert-Ultra test results. Results: Among 946 culture-negative individuals, 917 were Xpert-negative, 12 Xpert-trace-positive and 17 Xpert-positive (grade very low, low, medium or high), with Xpert categorised as the highest grade of the two sample results. Among 63 culture-positive individuals, 8 were Xpert-negative, 9 Xpert-trace-positive and 46 Xpert-positive. Counting trace-positive results as positive, the sensitivity of Xpert-Ultra compared with culture was 87% (95% CI 76% to 94%) using two samples compared with 76% (95% CI 64% to 86%) using one. Specificity was 97% when trace-positive results were counted as positive and 98% when trace-positive results were counted as negative. Most Xpert-Ultra-positive/culture-negative discordance was among individuals whose Xpert-positive results were trace-positive or very low grade or they reported previous TB treatment. Among individuals with both Xpert-Ultra results grade low or above, the positive-predictive-value was 90% (27/30); 3/30 were plausibly false-negative culture results. Conclusion: Using Xpert-Ultra as the primary diagnostic test in TBPS, with culture only for confirmatory testing, would identify a high proportion of TB cases while massively reducing survey culture requirements. Trial registration number: NCT03739736

    Identifying community risk factors for HIV among South African adolescents with mental health problems: A qualitative study of parental perceptions

    No full text
    High risk sexual behaviour, alcohol and drug use, and mental health problems combine to yield high levels of HIV-risk behaviour among adolescents with mental health problems. In South Africa, little research has been conducted on parental perspectives of HIV-risk among this population. We conducted a series of focus group discussions with 28 mothers of adolescents receiving services at two mental health clinics in South Africa to identify, from their perspectives, the key community problems facing their children. Participants indicated that HIV remained a serious threat to their adolescent children’s well-being, in addition to substance abuse, early sexual debut, and teenage pregnancy. These social problems were mentioned as external to their household dynamics, and thus seemingly beyond the purview of the parent–adolescent relationship. These data have implications for the design of family-based interventions to ameliorate the factors associated with HIV-risk among youth receiving mental health services.Journal of Child and Adolescent Mental Health 2014, 26(3): 165–17
    corecore