Use of a Rapid HIV Home Test Prevents HIV Exposure in a High Risk Sample of Men Who Have Sex With Men

HIV Center for Clinical and Behavioral Studies at New York State Psychiatric Institute and Columbia University, 1051 Riverside Drive, Unit 15, New York, NY, 10032, USA, .
AIDS and Behavior (Impact Factor: 3.49). 08/2012; 16(7):1753-60. DOI: 10.1007/s10461-012-0274-2
Source: PubMed


The study assessed whether at-risk HIV-uninfected men who have sex with men (MSM) who never or rarely use condoms and have multiple partners would use a rapid, oral fluid, HIV home test (HT) to screen potential sexual partners. Participants received 16 HT kits, were monitored weekly for 3 months, and then interviewed in depth. Twenty-seven ethnically diverse MSM used HT kits before intercourse with approximately 100 partners in private and public spaces. Testing had high acceptability among ethnic minority participants. Ten tested individuals received HIV-antibody positive results. Seven were potential sexual partners, and three were acquaintances of the participants; six of the ten were unaware of their status. No sexual intercourse took place after positive tests. Very few problems occurred. Most participants strongly desired to continue using HT and to buy it freely. HT use results in detection of previously unknown infections. Making HT available within networks where high-risk sexual practices are common may be a cost-efficient and effective prevention method.


Available from: Timothy Frasca, Jan 14, 2014
  • Source
    • "Participants also reported a change in choice of partners and in seven instances when a potential partner tested positive by a rapid HIV test kit, the sexual encounter stopped; more than one-half of the participants also ended sexual encounters when an HIV rapid test was refused by a sex partner.39 No sexual intercourse took place after a positive test, indicating that “point-of-sex” testing can lead to increased awareness of risk and can avert sex between discordant partners.40 In US-based studies, 73% of high-risk MSM (based on frequent condomless anal intercourse and changing sex partners) agreed to home self-testing, as did 82% of their sex partners.1 "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Approximately 60% of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected individuals are unaware of their infection, and stigma and discrimination continue to threaten acceptance of HIV testing services worldwide. Self-testing for HIV has garnered controversy for years and the debate reignited with the approval of a point-of-care test for over-the-counter sale in the US in 2012. Here, we present arguments for and against HIV self-testing. The case in support of HIV self-testing contends that: the modality is highly acceptable, especially among the most at-risk individuals; self-testing empowers users, thus helping to normalize testing; and mutual partner testing has the potential to increase awareness of risk and avert condomless sex between discordant partners. Arguments against HIV self-testing include: cost limits access to those who need testing most; false-negative results, especially during the window period, may lead to false reassurance and could promote sex between discordant partners at the time of highest infectivity; opportunities for counseling, linkage to care, and diagnosis of other sexually transmitted infections may be missed; and self-testing leads to potential for coercion between partners. Research is needed to better define the risks of self-testing, especially as performance of the assays improves, and to delineate the benefits of programs designed to improve access to self-test kits, because this testing modality has numerous potential advantages and drawbacks.
    HIV/AIDS - Research and Palliative Care 08/2014; 6:117-26. DOI:10.2147/HIV.S49083
  • Source
    • "Those tests allow individuals to self-administer the oral fluid rapid test and interpret results at their own desired time or location. Moreover, HIV self-testing kits have been found to be acceptable among selected members of high-risk communities, such as male injection drug users [16] and MSM who rarely or never use condoms [17]. However, self-testing kits are typically distributed through pharmacies, clinics, and online stores. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Introduction Rates of unrecognized HIV infection are significantly higher among Latino and Black men who have sex with men (MSM). Policy makers have proposed that HIV self-testing kits and new methods for delivering self-testing could improve testing uptake among minority MSM. This study sought to conduct qualitative assessments with MSM of color to determine the acceptability of using electronic vending machines to dispense HIV self-testing kits. Materials and Methods African American and Latino MSM were recruited using a participant pool from an existing HIV prevention trial on Facebook. If participants expressed interest in using a vending machine to receive an HIV self-testing kit, they were emailed a 4-digit personal identification number (PIN) code to retrieve the test from the machine. We followed up with those who had tested to assess their willingness to participate in an interview about their experience. Results Twelve kits were dispensed and 8 interviews were conducted. In general, participants expressed that the vending machine was an acceptable HIV test delivery method due to its novelty and convenience. Discussion Acceptability of this delivery model for HIV testing kits was closely associated with three main factors: credibility, confidentiality, and convenience. Future research is needed to address issues, such as user-induced errors and costs, before scaling up the dispensing method.
    PLoS ONE 07/2014; 9(7):e103790. DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0103790 · 3.23 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "HST encouraged testing equally among both genders [24]. Moreover, it encouraged repeated testing and first-time testing in hard-to-reach groups [20,22,23]. Even in African countries with existing successful testing programmes HST increased the reach of HIV testing services: 41% of participants in Malawi had never tested before and 78% had tested longer than a year ago [24]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The uptake of HIV testing and counselling services remains low in risk groups around the world. Fear of stigmatisation, discrimination and breach of confidentiality results in low service usage among risk groups. HIV self-testing (HST) is a confidential HIV testing option that enables people to find out their status in the privacy of their homes. We evaluated the acceptability of HST and the benefits and challenges linked to the introduction of HST. A literature review was conducted on the acceptability of HST in projects in which HST was offered to study participants. Besides acceptability rates of HST, accuracy rates of self-testing, referral rates of HIV-positive individuals into medical care, disclosure rates and rates of first-time testers were assessed. In addition, the utilisation rate of a telephone hotline for counselling issues and clients` attitudes towards HST were extracted. Eleven studies met the inclusion criteria (HST had been offered effectively to study participants and had been administered by participants themselves) and demonstrated universally high acceptability of HST among study populations. Studies included populations from resource poor settings (Kenya and Malawi) and from high-income countries (USA, Spain and Singapore). The majority of study participants were able to perform HST accurately with no or little support from trained staff. Participants appreciated the confidentiality and privacy but felt that the provision of adequate counselling services was inadequate. The review demonstrates that HST is an acceptable testing alternative for risk groups and can be performed accurately by the majority of self-testers. Clients especially value the privacy and confidentiality of HST. Linkage to counselling as well as to treatment and care services remain major challenges.
    BMC Public Health 08/2013; 13(1):735. DOI:10.1186/1471-2458-13-735 · 2.26 Impact Factor
Show more