Implementing the TST for IPT initiation was feasible and acceptable in both urban and rural resource-constrained settings. This strategy allows patients who can benefit the most to receive long-term IPT and avoids unnecessarily treating a significant number of patients who do not stand to benefit.
Background Pre-exposure-prophylaxis (PrEP) has been heralded for its potential to put women in control of preventing HIV infection, but uptake and continuation rates have been disappointing in high-incidence settings in sub-Saharan Africa. We explored structural and social factors that influenced PrEP use among young women and pregnant or breastfeeding women in rural Eswatini. Methods We conducted two in-depth interviews with ten women on PrEP, and one-time in-depth interviews with fourteen women who declined or discontinued PrEP. Interviews covered decision-making processes around PrEP initiation and experiences with pill-taking. In-depth interviews were conducted with nine health workers, covering experiences in delivering PrEP services, and two focus group discussions were held with men to elicit their perceptions of PrEP. Interviews and discussions were audio-recorded, translated, transcribed and analysed thematically, using an inductive approach. Results PrEP initiation and use were experienced by many women as empowering them to take control of their health and well-being, and stay HIV free, facilitating them to realise their aspirations relating to motherhood and educational attainment. However, the social norms that defined relationship dynamics with partners or family members either undermined or promoted this empowerment potential. In particular, young women were rarely supported by family members to take PrEP unless it was perceived to be for protecting an unborn child. Stigmatisation of pill-taking through its associations with HIV and the burden of daily pill-taking also contributed to PrEP discontinuation. Conclusions Unlike many prevention tools, PrEP enabled women to achieve a sense of control over their lives. Nevertheless, women’s agency to continue and adhere to PrEP was influenced by social and structural factors including gender norms, family expectations of young women, relationship dynamics and stigma related to HIV. Future interventions should address these barriers to promote PrEP use among sexually-active women.
Although efficacy of 36 months isoniazid preventive therapy (IPT) among HIV-positive individuals has been proven in trial settings, outcome, tolerance, and adherence have rarely been evaluated in real-life settings.This is a prospective observational cohort study conducted in 2 primary care rural clinics in Swaziland.After negative tuberculosis symptom screening, patients either with the positive tuberculin skin test (TST) or after tuberculosis treatment were initiated on IPT for 144 weeks. In addition to routine clinic visits, adherence was assessed every semester.Of 288 eligible patients, 2 patients never started IPT (1 refusal, 1 contraindication), and 253 (87.8%), 234 (81.3%), and 228 (79.2%) were still on IPT after 48, 96, and 144 weeks, respectively (chi2P = .01). Of 41 patients who interrupted IPT before 144 weeks, 21 defaulted (of which 17 also defaulted HIV care); 16 stopped because of adverse drug reactions; 2 were discontinued by clinicians’ mistake and 1 because of TB symptoms. Five patients (1.7%) died of causes not related to IPT, 5 (1.7%) developed TB of which 2 were isoniazid-resistant, and 9 (3.1%) were transferred to another clinic. As an indicator of adherence, isoniazid could be detected in the urine during 86.3% (302/350) and 73.6% (248/337) of patient visits in the 2 clinics, respectively (chi2P < .001).The routine implementation of IPT 36 months was feasible and good patient outcomes were achieved, with low TB incidence, good tolerance, and sustained adherence.
BACKGROUND: Xpert®MTB/RIF rapidly detects resistance to rifampicin (RR), however this test misses the I491F-RR conferring rpoB mutation, common in Southern Africa. In addition, Xpert®MTB/RIF does not distinguish between viable and dead Mycobacterium tuberculosis (MTB). OBJECTIVE: To investigate the ability of thin layer agar (TLA) direct drug-susceptibility testing (DST) to detect MTB and its drug-resistance profiles in field conditions in Eswatini. DESIGN: Consecutive samples were tested in parallel with Xpert®MTB/RIF and TLA for rifampicin (1.0 μg/ml) and ofloxacin (2.0 μg/ml). TLA results were compared at the Reference Laboratory in Antwerp with indirect DST on Löwenstein-Jensen or 7H11 solid media and additional phenotypic and genotypic testing to resolve discordance. RESULTS: TLA showed a positivity rate for MTB detection of 7.1% versus 10.0% for Xpert®MTB/RIF. Of a total of 4547 samples included in the study, 200 isolates were available for comparison to the composite reference. Within a median of 18.4 days, TLA detected RR with 93.0% sensitivity (CI-77.4-98.0) and 99.4% specificity (CI 96.7-99.9), versus 62.5% (CI 42.7-78.8) and 99.3% (CI 96.2-99.9) for Xpert®MTB/RIF. Eight isolates, 28.6% of all RR confirmed isolates, carried the I491F mutation, all detected by TLA. TLA also correctly identified 183 of the 184 ofloxacin-S isolates (99.5% specificity, CI 97.0-99.9). CONCLUSIONS: In field conditions, TLA rapidly detects RR, and in this specific setting contributed to detection of additional RR patients over Xpert®MTB/RIF, mainly but not exclusively due to I491F. TLA also accurately excluded fluoroquinolones resistance.
BackgroundViral load (VL) testing is being scaled up in resource-limited settings. However, not all commercially available VL testing methods have been evaluated under field conditions. This study is one of a few to evaluate the Biocentric platform for VL quantification in routine practice in Sub-Saharan Africa.MethodsVenous blood specimens were obtained from patients eligible for VL testing at two health facilities in Swaziland from October 2016 to March 2017. Samples were centrifuged at two laboratories (LAB-1, LAB-2) to obtain paired plasma specimens for VL quantification with the national reference method and on the Biocentric platform. Agreement (correlation, Bland–Altman) and accuracy (sensitivity, specificity) indicators were calculated at the VL thresholds of 416 (2.62 log10) and 1000 (3.0 log10) copies/mL. Leftover samples from patients with discordant VL results were re-quantified and accuracy indicators recalculated. Logistic regression was used to compare laboratory performance.ResultsA total of 364 paired plasma samples (LAB-1: n = 198; LAB-2: n = 166) were successfully tested using both methods. The correlation was high (R = 0.82, p < 0.01), and the Bland–Altman analysis showed a minimal mean difference (− 0.03 log10 copies/mL; 95% CI: -1.15 to 1.08). At the clinical threshold level of 3.0 log10 copies/mL, the sensitivity was 88.6% (95% CI: 78.7 to 94.9) and the specificity was 98.3% (95% CI: 96.1 to 99.4). Sensitivity was higher in LAB-1 (100%; 95% CI: 71.5 to 100) than in LAB-2 (86.4%; 95% CI: 75.0 to 94.0). Most upward (n = 8, 2.2%) and downward (n = 11, 3.0%) misclassifications occurred at the 2.62 log threshold, with LAB-2 having a 16 (95% CI: 2.26 to 113.27; p = 0.006) times higher odds of downward misclassification. After retesting of discordant leftover samples (n = 17), overall sensitivity increased to 93.5% (95% CI: 85.5 to 97.9) and 97.1% (95% CI: 90.1 to 99.7) at the 2.62 and 3.0 thresholds, and specificity increased to 98.6% (95% CI: 96.5 to 99.6) and 99.0% (95% CI: 97.0 to 99.8) respectively.ConclusionsThe test characteristics of the Biocentric platform were overall comparable to the national reference method for VL quantification. One laboratory tended to misclassify VL results downwards, likely owing to unmet training needs and lack of previous hands-on practice.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12879-018-3474-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.