Verification of HIV Self-Testing Use and Results: A Global Systematic Review.

HIV self-testing (HIVST) allows individuals to interpret and report their own test results, thus decentralizing testing. Yet, this decentralization can make it difficult to verify self-testing results, which is important for linkage to care and surveillance. The aim of this systematic review is to summarize methods for verifying HIVST use and results. We followed guidance from the Cochrane Handbook 5.1 on systematic reviews. We searched four journal databases (PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane Library), one clinical trials database (ClinicalTrials.gov), two conference abstract databases (International AIDS Society and Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections) and one gray literature database (OpenGrey). We included studies that verified opening of kits or test results. Two researchers independently screened articles and extracted data regarding HIVST location, method of verification, who performed verification, proportion of results verified, and primary or secondary kit distribution. The search yielded 3853 unique citations, of which 40 contained information on HIVST verification and were included. Among these 40 studies, 13 were in high-income countries, 16 were in middle-income countries, and 11 were in low-income countries. Seventeen studies included key populations and two focused on youth. Three methods verified results: supervision by a health provider, returning used test kits, and electronic transmission of photographs. One method verified opening of kits using Bluetooth sensors. Although HIVST has increased worldwide, strategies to verify self-testing results remain limited. These findings suggest a need for additional innovative strategies for verifying HIVST use and results and linkage of self-testing results to surveillance and care systems.

Chlamydia and Vaginitis in Sexually Active Females: Classical Identification Methods for Effective Control

Laboratory diagnosis of Chlamydia and vaginitis in sexually active females has been limited by unavailability of a sequential method/rapid technique for simple diagnosis. Six hundred (600) adult females from hotel/brothel; Sexually Transmitted Infections (STIs) Clinic; Obstetrics/Gynaecology Clinic; Family Planning Clinic and Healthy controls were investigated for Chlamydia; Candida; trichomoniasis and bacterial vaginosis (BV). This was done using microscopy: wet mount; stained vaginal secretion and stained smear after culture. Results showed that there were 72infections in the female groups. The brothel and STI group had infection in the range (70-86). Chlamydial infection was highest in the STI group while Candida infection was highest in the healthy (control) females. Bacterial vaginosis was distributed in all groups. As p-value increased; f-value increased indicating constant co-infection of Candida and BV in Chlamydia positive females. Microscopy by direct detection from sample and stained smear after culture were in the range: 56-86. Direct microscopy for BV was 78.5and stained smear after culture; 57.1. Sensitivity and specificity of the techniques showed that detection of Chlamydia was less sensitive by direct microscopy of sample but sensitivity and specificity of stained smear after culture were high. Immunoassay (32.2) was also less sensitive. Sensitivity and specificity of wet mount microscopy for Candida; Trichomoniasis and BV were in the range 62.5 - 80and 62.5-97.8respectively. Wet mount has high sensitivity and specificity for detecting agents of vaginitis and may be useful for routine use and for diagnosis where disease is absent; thus; making identification more cost effective