"It is a process" - a qualitative evaluation of provider acceptability of HIV assisted partner services in western Kenya: experiences, challenges, and facilitators.
Acceptability
Assisted partner services
HIV testing
Qualitative research
Sexual partners
Western Kenya
Journal
BMC health services research
ISSN: 1472-6963
Titre abrégé: BMC Health Serv Res
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101088677
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
07 May 2022
07 May 2022
Historique:
received:
24
05
2021
accepted:
27
04
2022
entrez:
7
5
2022
pubmed:
8
5
2022
medline:
11
5
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Assisted partner service (APS) is effective for increasing HIV testing services (HTS) uptake among sexual partners of people diagnosed with HIV with rare social harm. The acceptability of APS to HTS providers is important for the quality and effectiveness of APS delivery. Within a larger ongoing implementation science study of APS in western Kenya, we qualitatively evaluated the provider acceptability of APS. From May-June 2020, we conducted virtual, semi-structured in-depth interviews with 14 HTS providers recruited from 8 of 31 study health facilities in Homa Bay and Kisumu counties. Participants were selected using criteria-based purposive sampling to maximize variation on patient volume (assessed by the number of index clients tested for HIV) and APS performance (assessed by sexual partners elicitation and enrollment). Interviews inquired providers' experiences providing APS including challenges and facilitators and the impact of contextual factors. Data were analyzed using an inductive approach. Overall, HTS providers found APS acceptable. It was consistently reported that doing APS was a continuous process rather than a one-day job, which required building rapport and persistent efforts. Benefits of APS including efficiency in HIV case finding, expanded testing coverage in men, and increased HIV status awareness and linkage to care motivated the providers. Provider referral was perceived advantageous in terms of independent contact with partners on behalf of index clients and efficiency in partner tracing. Challenges of providing APS included protecting clients' confidentiality, difficulty obtaining partners' accurate contact information, logistic barriers of tracing, and clients' refusal due to fear of being judged for multiple sexual partners, fear of breach of confidentiality, and HIV stigma. Building rapport with clients, communicating with patience and nonjudgmental attitude and assuring confidentiality were examples of facilitators. Working in rural areas and bigger facilities, training, supportive supervision, and community awareness of APS promoted APS delivery while low salaries, lack of equipment, and high workload undermined it. HTS providers found APS acceptable. Delivering APS as a process was the key to success. Future scale-up of APS could consider encouraging provider referral instead of the other APS methods to improve efficiency and reduce potential harm to clients.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Assisted partner service (APS) is effective for increasing HIV testing services (HTS) uptake among sexual partners of people diagnosed with HIV with rare social harm. The acceptability of APS to HTS providers is important for the quality and effectiveness of APS delivery. Within a larger ongoing implementation science study of APS in western Kenya, we qualitatively evaluated the provider acceptability of APS.
METHODS
METHODS
From May-June 2020, we conducted virtual, semi-structured in-depth interviews with 14 HTS providers recruited from 8 of 31 study health facilities in Homa Bay and Kisumu counties. Participants were selected using criteria-based purposive sampling to maximize variation on patient volume (assessed by the number of index clients tested for HIV) and APS performance (assessed by sexual partners elicitation and enrollment). Interviews inquired providers' experiences providing APS including challenges and facilitators and the impact of contextual factors. Data were analyzed using an inductive approach.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Overall, HTS providers found APS acceptable. It was consistently reported that doing APS was a continuous process rather than a one-day job, which required building rapport and persistent efforts. Benefits of APS including efficiency in HIV case finding, expanded testing coverage in men, and increased HIV status awareness and linkage to care motivated the providers. Provider referral was perceived advantageous in terms of independent contact with partners on behalf of index clients and efficiency in partner tracing. Challenges of providing APS included protecting clients' confidentiality, difficulty obtaining partners' accurate contact information, logistic barriers of tracing, and clients' refusal due to fear of being judged for multiple sexual partners, fear of breach of confidentiality, and HIV stigma. Building rapport with clients, communicating with patience and nonjudgmental attitude and assuring confidentiality were examples of facilitators. Working in rural areas and bigger facilities, training, supportive supervision, and community awareness of APS promoted APS delivery while low salaries, lack of equipment, and high workload undermined it.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
HTS providers found APS acceptable. Delivering APS as a process was the key to success. Future scale-up of APS could consider encouraging provider referral instead of the other APS methods to improve efficiency and reduce potential harm to clients.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35525931
doi: 10.1186/s12913-022-08024-z
pii: 10.1186/s12913-022-08024-z
pmc: PMC9078086
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
616Informations de copyright
© 2022. The Author(s).
Références
Sex Transm Infect. 2012 Aug;88(5):386-93
pubmed: 22427489
BMC Public Health. 2010 Jan 18;10:19
pubmed: 20082718
AIDS. 2017 Aug 24;31(13):1867-1876
pubmed: 28590326
AIDS Behav. 2018 Oct;22(10):3407-3416
pubmed: 29372453
AIDS Patient Care STDS. 2016 Nov;30(11):506-511
pubmed: 27849369
Sex Transm Dis. 2013 Dec;40(12):909-14
pubmed: 24220349
AIDS Behav. 2020 May;24(5):1476-1485
pubmed: 31705346
J Int AIDS Soc. 2019 Jul;22 Suppl 3:e25321
pubmed: 31321918
BMC Health Serv Res. 2017 Jan 26;17(1):88
pubmed: 28126032
Am J Prev Med. 2009 May;36(5):452-7
pubmed: 19362699
JMIR Res Protoc. 2021 May 20;10(5):e27262
pubmed: 34014172
J Int AIDS Soc. 2019 Jul;22 Suppl 3:e25315
pubmed: 31321915
Sex Transm Dis. 2016 Nov;43(11):690-695
pubmed: 27893598
HIV AIDS (Auckl). 2013;5:19-28
pubmed: 23382646
J Int AIDS Soc. 2019 Jul;22 Suppl 3:e25314
pubmed: 31321909
BMC Health Serv Res. 2018 Jan 31;18(1):75
pubmed: 29386023
Malawi Med J. 2015 Dec;27(4):140-4
pubmed: 26955435
Lancet HIV. 2017 Feb;4(2):e74-e82
pubmed: 27913227