Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 6 de 6
Filter
1.
Int J Infect Dis ; 118: 183-193, 2022 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1838865

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Molecular testing for Chlamydia trachomatis (CT) and Neisseria gonorrhoeae (NG) is costly. Therefore, we appraised the evidence regarding pooling samples from multiple individuals to test for CT/NG. METHODS: In this systematic review, we searched 5 databases (2000-2021). Studies were included if they contained primary data describing pooled testing. We calculated the pooled sensitivities and specificities for CT and NG using a bivariate mixed-effects logistic regression model. RESULTS: We included 22 studies: most were conducted in high-income countries (81.8%, 18 of 22), among women (73.3%, 17 of 22), and pooled urine samples (63.6%, 14 of 22). Eighteen studies provided 25 estimates for the meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy, with data from 6,913 pooled specimens. The pooled sensitivity for CT was 98.4% (95% confidence intervals [CI]: 96.8-99.2%, I2=77.5, p<0.001), and pooled specificity was 99.9% (95% CI: 99.6-100.0%, I2=62.6, p<0.001). Only 2 studies reported pooled testing for NG, and both reported similarly high sensitivity and specificity as for CT. Sixteen studies provided data on the cost of pooling, reporting cost-savings ranging from 39%-90%. CONCLUSIONS: Pooled testing from multiple individuals for CT is highly sensitive and specific compared with individual testing. This approach has the potential to reduce the cost of screening in populations for which single anatomic site screening is recommended.


Subject(s)
Chlamydia Infections , Gonorrhea , Chlamydia Infections/diagnosis , Chlamydia trachomatis , Female , Gonorrhea/diagnosis , Humans , Male , Mass Screening , Neisseria gonorrhoeae/genetics , Sensitivity and Specificity
5.
Lancet HIV ; 8(8): e502-e510, 2021 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1307281

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In 2016, the UN General Assembly set a global target of 3 million oral pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) users by 2020. With this target at an end, we aimed to assess global trends in the adoption of WHO PrEP recommendations into national guidelines and numbers of PrEP users, defined as people who received oral PrEP at least once in a given year, and to estimate future trajectories of PrEP use. METHODS: In this global summary and forecasting study, data on adoption of WHO PrEP recommendations and numbers of PrEP users were obtained through the Global AIDS Monitoring system and WHO regional offices. Trends in these indicators for 2016-19 by region and for 2019 by country were described, including by gender and priority populations where data were available. PrEP user numbers were forecasted until 2023 by selecting countries with at least 3 years of PrEP user data as example countries in each region to represent possible future PrEP user trajectories. PrEP user growth rates observed in example countries were applied to countries in corresponding regions under different scenarios, including a COVID-19 disruption scenario with static global PrEP use in 2020. FINDINGS: By the end of 2019, 120 (67%) of 180 countries with data had adopted the WHO PrEP recommendations into national guidelines (23 in 2019 and 30 in 2018). In 2019, there were about 626 000 PrEP users across 77 countries, including 260 000 (41·6%) in the region of the Americas and 213 000 (34·0%) in the African region; this is a 69% increase from about 370 000 PrEP users across 66 countries in 2018. Without COVID-19 disruptions, 0·9-1·1 million global PrEP users were projected by the end of 2020 and 2·4-5·3 million are projected by the end of 2023. If COVID-19 disruptions resulted in no PrEP user growth in 2020, the projected number of PrEP users in 2023 is 2·1-3·0 million. INTERPRETATION: Widespread adoption of WHO PrEP recommendations coincided with a global increase in PrEP use. Although the 2020 global PrEP target will be missed, strong future growth in PrEP use is possible. New PrEP products could expand the PrEP user base, and, with greater expansion of oral PrEP, further adoption of WHO PrEP recommendations, and simplified delivery, PrEP could contribute to ending AIDS by 2030. FUNDING: Unitaid, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, and WHO.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Global Health/trends , HIV Infections/prevention & control , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis , SARS-CoV-2 , Female , Humans , Male , World Health Organization
6.
Lancet Glob Health ; 9(7): e977-e988, 2021 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1275796

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Secondary distribution of HIV self-testing (HIVST) kits by patients attending clinic services to their partners could improve the rate of HIV diagnosis. We aimed to investigate whether secondary administration of HIVST kits, with or without an additional financial incentive, via women receiving antenatal care (ANC) or via people newly diagnosed with HIV (ie, index patients) could improve the proportion of male partners tested or the number of people newly diagnosed with HIV. METHODS: We did a three-arm, open-label, pragmatic, cluster-randomised trial of 27 health centres (clusters), eligible if they were a government primary health centre providing ANC, HIV testing, and ART services, across four districts of Malawi. We recruited women (aged ≥18 years) attending their first ANC visit and whose male partner was available, not already taking ART, and not already tested for HIV during this pregnancy (ANC cohort), and people (aged ≥18 years) with newly diagnosed HIV during routine clinic HIV testing who had at least one sexual contact not already known to be HIV-positive (index cohort). Centres were randomly assigned (1:1:1), using a public selection of computer-generated random allocations, to enhanced standard of care (including an invitation for partners to attend HIV testing services), HIVST only, or HIVST plus a US$10 financial incentive for retesting. The primary outcome for the ANC cohort was the proportion of male partners reportedly tested, as ascertained by interview with women in this cohort at day 28. The primary outcome for the index cohort was the geometric mean number of new HIV-positive people identified per facility within 28 days of enrolment, as measured by observed HIV test results. Cluster-level summaries compared intervention with standard of care by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03705611. FINDINGS: Between Sept 8, 2018, and May 2, 2019, nine clusters were assigned to each trial arm, resulting in 4544 eligible women in the ANC cohort (1447 [31·8%] in the standard care group, 1465 [32·2%] in the HIVST only group, and 1632 [35·9%] in HIVST plus financial incentive group) and 708 eligible patients in the index cohort (234 [33·1%] in the standard care group, 169 [23·9%] in the HIVST only group, and 305 [42·9%] in the HIVST plus financial incentive group). 4461 (98·2%) of 4544 eligible women in the ANC cohort and 645 (91·1%) of 708 eligible patients in the index cohort were recruited, of whom 3378 (75·7%) in the ANC cohort and 439 (68·1%) in the index cohort were interviewed after 28 days. In the ANC cohort, the mean proportion of reported partner testing per cluster was 35·0% (SD 10·0) in the standard care group, 73·0% in HIVST only group (13·1, adjusted risk ratio [RR] 1·71, 95% CI 1·48-1·98; p<0·0001), and 65·2% in the HIVST plus financial incentive group (11·6, adjusted RR 1·62, 1·45-1·81; p<0·0001). In the index cohort, the geometric mean number of new HIV-positive sexual partners per cluster was 1·35 (SD 1·62) for the standard care group, 1·91 (1·78) for the HIVST only group (incidence rate ratio adjusted for number eligible as an offset in the negative binomial model 1·65, 95% CI 0·49-5·55; p=0·3370), and 3·20 (3·81) for the HIVST plus financial incentive group (3·11, 0·99-9·77; p=0·0440). Four self-resolving, temporary marital separations occurred due to disagreement in couples regarding HIV self-test kits. INTERPRETATION: Although administration of HIVST kits in the ANC cohort, even when offered alongside a financial incentive, did not identify significantly more male patients with HIV than did standard care, out-of-clinic options for HIV testing appear more acceptable to many male partners of women with HIV, increasing test uptake. Viewed in the current context, this approach might allow continuation of services despite COVID-19-related lockdowns. FUNDING: Unitaid, through the Self-Testing Africa Initiative.


Subject(s)
HIV Infections/diagnosis , HIV Testing/methods , Prenatal Care , Self-Testing , Sexual Partners , Adult , Cluster Analysis , Female , HIV Infections/epidemiology , HIV Testing/economics , Humans , Malawi/epidemiology , Male , Motivation , Pregnancy , Reagent Kits, Diagnostic , Young Adult
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL