No abstract

BackgroundThe uptake of HIV self-testing (HIVST) could address socio-structural barriers that prevent South African youth from utilizing the testing resources available in their communities. However, to facilitate this, we must tailor components of the HIVST kit and process to ensure that we reach and encourage youth to test. The purpose of this study to elucidate concerns and issues regarding HIVST rollout among South African youth.MethodsThis study was conducted in two phases: 1) focus group discussions with rural, South African youth aged 18–24 and 2) direct observations of participants completing with an oral HIVST kit and/or a blood based HIVST kit. In phase 2a participants were invited to try both an oral and blood-based HIVST kit. In phase 2b, participants selected the HIVST kit of their choice.ResultsWe enrolled 35 unique participants in phase 1, 20 participants in phase 2a, and 40 participants in phase 2b. While the focus group discussions highlighted hypothetical HIVST use only, participants appreciated the privacy that the HIVST could afford them. However, they expressed concerns about whether HIVST could be trusted due to false positives and negatives, as well as whether a person would be able to emotionally handle the results if they tested alone. They suggested that the kits be used alongside someone who could provide support. In phases 2a and 2b, participants were overwhelmingly positive about both kits regarding ease of use and whether their results could be trusted. The participants, however, experienced more challenges with the blood-based versus oral test. When given the choice in phase 2b, most participants (80%) chose the oral HIVST over the blood-based HIVST.ConclusionsDuring the focus group discussions, participants raised concerns about the validity of HIVST, lack of emotional support when testing alone, and the cost of HIVST kits, all of which could be addressed through current testing campaigns. Most of those who actually tested had positive experiences with HIVST and would recommend it to their friends. When offered a choice, most preferred the oral test.Trial registrationNCT03162965, registered 19th May 2017.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12889-019-6402-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

BackgroundPatient identification within and between health services is an operational challenge in many resource-limited settings. When following HIV risk groups for service provision and in the context of vaccine trials, patient misidentification can harm patient care and bias trial outcomes. Electronic fingerprinting has been proposed to identify patients over time and link patient data between health services. The objective of this study was to determine 1) the feasibility of implementing an electronic-fingerprint linked data capture system in Zambia and 2) the acceptability of this system among a key HIV risk group: female sex workers (FSWs).MethodsWorking with Biometrac, a US-based company providing biometric-linked healthcare platforms, an electronic fingerprint-linked data capture system was developed for use by field recruiters among Zambian FSWs. We evaluated the technical feasibility of the system for use in the field in Zambia and conducted a pilot study to determine the acceptability of the system, as well as barriers to uptake, among FSWs.ResultsWe found that implementation of an electronic fingerprint-linked patient tracking and data collection system was feasible in this relatively resource-limited setting (false fingerprint matching rate of 1/1000 and false rejection rate of <1/10,000) and was acceptable among FSWs in a clinic setting (2 % refusals). However, our data indicate that less than half of FSWs are comfortable providing an electronic fingerprint when recruited while they are working. The most common reasons cited for not providing a fingerprint (lack of privacy/confidentiality issues while at work, typically at bars or lodges) could be addressed by recruiting women during less busy hours, in their own homes, in the presence of “Queen Mothers” (FSW organizers), or in the presence of a FSW that has already been fingerprinted.ConclusionsOur findings have major implications for key population research and improved health services provision. However, more work needs to be done to increase the acceptability of the electronic fingerprint-linked data capture system during field recruitment. This study indicated several potential avenues that will be explored to increase acceptability.

Objective: To assess the effect of emergency transportation interventions on the outcome of labor and delivery in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Methods: Eleven databases were searched through December 2019: Medline/PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, EBSCO (PsycINFO and CINAHL), SCIELO, LILACS, JSTOR, POPLINE, Google Scholar, the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group’s Specialized Register, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Methodological quality of included studies was assessed using the ROBINS-I tool. Results: Nine studies (three in Asia and six in Africa) were included: one cluster randomized controlled trial, three controlled before-and-after (CBA) studies, four uncontrolled before and after studies, and one case-control study. The means of emergency obstetric transportation evaluated by the studies included bicycle (n = 1) or motorcycle ambulances (n = 3), 4-wheel drive vehicles (n = 3), and formal motor-vehicle ambulances (n = 2). Transportation support was offered within multi-component interventions including financial incentives (n = 1), improved communication (n = 7), and community mobilization (n = 2). Two controlled before-and-after studies that implemented interventions including financial support, three-wheeled motorcycles, and use of mobile phones reported reduction of maternal mortality. One cluster-randomized study which involved community mobilization and strengthening of referral, and transportation, and one controlled before-and-after that implemented free-of-charge, 24-hour, 4 × 4 wheel ambulance and a mobile phone showed reductions in stillbirth, perinatal, and neonatal mortality. Six studies reported increases in facility delivery ranging from 12–50%, and one study showed a 19% reduction in home delivery. There was a significant increase of caesarian sections in two studies; use of motorcycle ambulances compared to car ambulance resulted in reduction in referral delay by 2 to 4.5 hours. Only three included studies had low risk of bias on all domains. Conclusion: Integrating emergency obstetric transportation with complimentary maternal health interventions may reduce adverse pregnancy outcomes and increase access to skilled obstetric services for women in LMICs. The strength of evidence is limited by the paucity of high-quality studies.

Background: Medical cannabis (MC) is currently being used as an adjunct to opiates given its analgesic effects and potential to reduce opiate addiction. This review assessed if MC used in combination with opioids to treat noncancer chronic pain would reduce opioid dosage. Methods: Four databases-Ovid (Medline), Psyc-INFO, PubMed, Web of Science, and grey literature-were searched to identify original research that assessed the effects of MC on non-cancer chronic pain in humans. Study eligibility included randomized controlled trials, controlled before-and-after studies, cohort studies, cross-sectional studies, and case reports. All databases were searched for articles published from inception to October 31, 2019. Cochrane's ROBINS-I tool and the AXIS tool were used for risk of bias assessment. PRISMA guidelines were followed in reporting the systematic review. Results: Nine studies involving 7222 participants were included. There was a 64-75% reduction in opioid dosage when used in combination with MC. Use of MC for opioid substitution was reported by 32-59.3% of patients with non-cancer chronic pain. One study reported a slight decrease in mean hospital admissions in the past calendar year (P = .53) and decreased mean emergency department visits in the past calendar year (P = .39) for patients who received MC as an adjunct to opioids in the treatment of non-cancer chronic pain compared to those who did not receive MC. All included studies had high risk of bias, which was mainly due to their methods. Conclusions: While this review indicated the likelihood of reducing opioid dosage when used in combination with MC, we cannot make a causal inference. Although medical cannabis' recognized analgesic properties make it a viable option to achieve opioid dosage reduction, the evidence from this review cannot be relied upon to promote MC as an adjunct to opioids in treating non-cancer chronic pain. More so, the optimal MC dosage to achieve opioid dosage reduction remains unknown. Therefore, more research is needed to elucidate whether MC used in combination with opioids in the treatment of non-cancer chronic pain is associated with health consequences that are yet unknown.