Stigma in health facilities undermines diagnosis, treatment, and successful health outcomes. Addressing stigma is fundamental to delivering quality healthcare and achieving optimal health. This correspondence article seeks to assess how developments over the past 5 years have contributed to the state of programmatic knowledge—both approaches and methods—regarding interventions to reduce stigma in health facilities, and explores the potential to concurrently address multiple health condition stigmas. It is supported by findings from a systematic review of published articles indexed in PubMed, Psychinfo and Web of Science, and in the United States Agency for International Development’s Development Experience Clearinghouse, which was conducted in February 2018 and restricted to the past 5 years. Forty-two studies met inclusion criteria and provided insight on interventions to reduce HIV, mental illness, or substance abuse stigma. Multiple common approaches to address stigma in health facilities emerged, which were implemented in a variety of ways. The literature search identified key gaps including a dearth of stigma reduction interventions in health facilities that focus on tuberculosis, diabetes, leprosy, or cancer; target multiple cadres of staff or multiple ecological levels; leverage interactive technology; or address stigma experienced by health workers. Preliminary results from ongoing innovative responses to these gaps are also described. The current evidence base of stigma reduction in health facilities provides a solid foundation to develop and implement interventions. However, gaps exist and merit further work. Future investment in health facility stigma reduction should prioritize the involvement of clients living with the stigmatized condition or behavior and health workers living with stigmatized conditions and should address both individual and structural level stigma.

BackgroundDespite Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) being the epicenter of the HIV epidemic, uptake of HIV testing is not optimal. While qualitative studies have been undertaken to investigate factors influencing uptake of HIV testing, systematic reviews to provide a more comprehensive understanding are lacking.MethodsUsing Noblit and Hare’s meta-ethnography method, we synthesised published qualitative research to understand factors enabling and deterring uptake of HIV testing in SSA. We identified 5,686 citations out of which 56 were selected for full text review and synthesised 42 papers from 13 countries using Malpass’ notion of first-, second-, and third-order constructs.ResultsThe predominant factors enabling uptake of HIV testing are deterioration of physical health and/or death of sexual partner or child. The roll-out of various HIV testing initiatives such as ‘opt-out’ provider-initiated HIV testing and mobile HIV testing has improved uptake of HIV testing by being conveniently available and attenuating fear of HIV-related stigma and financial costs. Other enabling factors are availability of treatment and social network influence and support. Major barriers to uptake of HIV testing comprise perceived low risk of HIV infection, perceived health workers’ inability to maintain confidentiality and fear of HIV-related stigma. While the increasingly wider availability of life-saving treatment in SSA is an incentive to test, the perceived psychological burden of living with HIV inhibits uptake of HIV testing. Other barriers are direct and indirect financial costs of accessing HIV testing, and gender inequality which undermines women’s decision making autonomy about HIV testing. Despite differences across SSA, the findings suggest comparable factors influencing HIV testing.ConclusionsImproving uptake of HIV testing requires addressing perception of low risk of HIV infection and perceived inability to live with HIV. There is also a need to continue addressing HIV-related stigma, which is intricately linked to individual economic support. Building confidence in the health system through improving delivery of health care and scaling up HIV testing strategies that attenuate social and economic costs of seeking HIV testing could also contribute towards increasing uptake of HIV testing in SSA.

Background Universal testing and treatment (UTT) is a potential strategy to reduce HIV incidence, yet prior trial results are inconsistent. We report results from HPTN 071 (PopART), the largest HIV prevention trial to date. Methods In this community-randomized trial (2013-18), 21 communities in Zambia and South Africa were randomized to Arm A (PopART intervention, universal antiretroviral therapy [ART]), Arm B (PopART intervention, ART per local guidelines), and Arm C (standard-of-care). The PopART intervention included home-based HIV-testing delivered by community workers who supported linkage-to-care, ART adherence, and other services. The primary outcome, HIV incidence between months 12-36, was measured in a Population Cohort (PC) of ~2,000 randomly-sampled adults/community aged 18-44y. Viral suppression (VS, <400 copies HIV RNA/ml) was measured in all HIV-positive PC participants at 24m. Results The PC included 48,301 participants. Baseline HIV prevalence was similar across study arms (21%-22%). Between months 12-36, 553 incident HIV infections were observed over 39,702 person-years (py; 1.4/100py; women: 1.7/100py; men: 0.8/100py). Adjusted rate-ratios were A vs. C: 0.93 (95%CI: 0.74-1.18, p=0.51); B vs. C: 0.70 (95%CI: 0.55-0.88, p=0.006). At 24m, VS was 71.9% in Arm A; 67.5% in Arm B; and 60.2% in Arm C. ART coverage after 36m was 81% in Arm A and 80% in Arm B. Conclusions The PopART intervention with ART per local guidelines reduced HIV incidence by 30%. The lack of effect with universal ART was surprising and inconsistent with VS data. This study provides evidence that UTT can reduce HIV incidence at population level. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01900977

No abstract

We aimed to model the incidence of infection with Mycobacterium tuberculosis among adults using data on infection incidence in children, disease prevalence in adults, and social contact patterns. We conducted a cross-sectional face-to-face survey of adults in 2011, enumerating “close” (shared conversation) and “casual” (shared indoor space) social contacts in 16 Zambian communities and 8 South African communities. We modeled the incidence of M. tuberculosis infection in all age groups using these contact patterns, as well as the observed incidence of M. tuberculosis infection in children and the prevalence of tuberculosis disease in adults. A total of 3,528 adults participated in the study. The reported rates of close and casual contact were 4.9 per adult per day (95% confidence interval: 4.6, 5.2) and 10.4 per adult per day (95% confidence interval: 9.3, 11.6), respectively. Rates of close contact were higher for adults in larger households and rural areas. There was preferential mixing of close contacts within age groups and within sexes. The estimated incidence of M. tuberculosis infection in adults was 1.5–6 times higher (2.5%–10% per year) than that in children. More than 50% of infections in men, women, and children were estimated to be due to contact with adult men. We conclude that estimates of infection incidence based on surveys in children might underestimate incidence in adults. Most infections may be due to contact with adult men. Treatment and control of tuberculosis in men is critical to protecting men, women, and children from tuberculosis.

No abstract

IntroductionHealth worker motivation can potentially affect the provision of health services. Low morale among the workforce can undermine the quality of service provision and drive workers away from the profession. While the presence of high-quality, motivated staff is a key aspect of health system performance, it is also one of the most difficult factors to measure.MethodsWe assessed health worker motivation as part of the baseline assessment for a health system strengthening intervention in three rural districts in Zambia. The intervention (Better Health Outcomes Through Mentoring and Assessment (BHOMA)) aims to increase health worker motivation through training, mentoring and support. We assessed motivation by examining underlying issues grouped around relevant outcome constructs such as job satisfaction, general motivation, burnout, organization commitment, conscientiousness and timeliness that collectively measure overall levels of motivation. The tools and the concepts have been used in high-income countries and they were recently applied in African settings to measure health worker motivation.ResultsFemale participants had the highest motivation scores (female: mean 78.5 (SD 7.8) vs male: mean (SD 7.0)). By type of worker, nurses had the highest scores while environmental health technicians had the lowest score (77.4 (SD 7.8 vs 73.2 (SD 9.3)). Health workers who had been in post longer also had higher scores (>7 months). Health workers who had received some form of training in the preceding 12 months were more likely to have a higher score; this was also true for those older than 40 years when compared to those less than 40 years of age. The highest score values were noted in conscientiousness and timeliness, with all districts scoring above 80.ConclusionsThis study evaluated motivation among rural health workers using a simple adapted tool to measure the concept of motivation. Results showed variation in motivation score by sex, type of health worker, training and time in post. Further research is needed to establish why these health worker attributes were associated with motivation and whether health system interventions targeting health workers, such as the current intervention, could influence health worker motivation.

SummaryBackgroundThe HPTN 071 (PopART) cluster-randomised trial provided door-to-door HIV testing services to a large proportion of individuals residing in 21 intervention communities in Zambia and South Africa from 2014 to 2017 and reached the UNAIDS first 90 target among women in Zambia, yet gaps remained among men and young adults. This cluster-randomised study nested in the HPTN 071 (PopART) trial sought to increase knowledge of HIV status across all groups by offering the choice of oral HIV self-testing in addition to routine door-to-door HIV testing services.MethodsWe nested this cluster-randomised trial in four HTPN 071 (PopART) intervention communities in northern Zambia. 66 zones (clusters) in these communities were randomly allocated (1:1) to either oral HIV self-testing plus routine door-to-door HIV testing services (HIV self-testing group) or the PopART standard of care of door-to-door HIV testing services alone (non- HIV self-testing group) over a 3-month period. All individuals aged 16 years or older were eligible for HIV testing. Randomisation was achieved by randomly selecting one allocation from a list of 10 000 possible allocations during a public ceremony. In HIV self-testing zones, trained lay-counsellors (known as community HIV care providers) visited households and offered eligible individuals the choice of HIV testing using HIV self-testing or routine door-to-door HIV testing services. For individuals aged 18 years or older whose partner was absent during the household visit, an HIV self-test kit could be left for secondary distribution to the absent partner. The primary outcome was knowledge of HIV status (defined as self-reporting HIV positive to the community HIV care providers or accepting an offer of HIV testing services). Outcomes were measured among households that were first visited, and individuals first enumerated as a household member during the HIV self-testing intervention period. We analysed data at the individual level using population-average logistic regression models, accounting for clustering of outcomes by zone, to estimate the effect of the intervention. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02994329.FindingsBetween Feb 1, and April 30, 2017, the community HIV care providers enumerated 13 267 eligible individuals in the HIV self-testing group and 13 706 in the non-HIV self-testing group. After intervention implementation, 9027 (68%) of 13 267 in the HIV self-testing group had knowledge of HIV status compared with 8952 (65%) of 13 706 in the non-HIV self-testing group (adjusted odds ratio 1·30, 95% CI 1·03–1·65; p=0·03). The effect differed by sex (pinteraction=0·01). Among men, knowledge of HIV status was higher in the HIV self-testing group than in the non-HIV self-testing group (3843 [60%] of 6368 vs 3571 [55%] of 6486; adjusted odds ratio 1·31, 95% CI 1·07–1·60; p=0·01). There was no evidence of a between-group difference among female participants.InterpretationProviding a choice of HIV self-testing during delivery of door-to-door HIV testing ser...