Opt-in HIV testing in construction workplaces: an exploration of its suitability, using the socioecological framework.

Construction HIV Health promotion Health protection Health screening Men’s health Sexual health Workplace

Journal

BMC public health
ISSN: 1471-2458
Titre abrégé: BMC Public Health
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100968562

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
23 07 2022
Historique:
received: 20 01 2022
accepted: 06 06 2022
entrez: 23 7 2022
pubmed: 24 7 2022
medline: 27 7 2022
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Late diagnosis of HIV remains a challenge, despite improved testing and treatment. Testing is often targeted at high-risk groups; workplace events might normalise testing and allow access to a wider population. The construction workforce has a number of risk factors for HIV. In the Test@Work study, HIV tests were delivered within general health checks to construction employees, with high uptake and acceptability. This paper reports on the experiences of construction managers and health professionals involved in Test@Work and explores the suitability of construction worksites as a venue for opt-in HIV testing. Qualitative interviews (n = 24) were conducted with construction managers who had facilitated health check/HIV testing (n = 13), and delivery partners (n = 11) including i) healthcare volunteers who had delivered general health checks (n = 7) and, ii) HIV professionals who had conducted HIV testing (n = 4) at 21 Test@Work events held on construction sites. Interviews explored their experiences of these events and views towards HIV testing in the workplace. Exit questionnaires (n = 107) were completed by delivery partners after every event, providing qualitative data identifying facilitators and barriers to effective delivery. Thematic analysis identified themes that were mapped against a socioecological framework. Delivery partners reported high engagement of construction workers with workplace HIV testing, peer-to-peer encouragement for uptake, and value for accessibility of onsite testing. HIV professionals valued the opportunity to reach an untested population, many of whom had a poor understanding of their exposure to HIV risk. Managers valued the opportunity to offer workplace health checks to employees but some identified challenges with event planning, or provision of private facilities. The construction sector is complex with a largely male workforce. Providing worksite HIV testing and education to an untested population who have poor knowledge about HIV risk helped to normalise testing, encourage uptake and reduce HIV-related stigma. However, there are practical barriers to testing in the construction environment. Rapid testing may not be the most suitable approach given the challenges of maintaining confidentiality on construction worksites and alternatives should be explored.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
Late diagnosis of HIV remains a challenge, despite improved testing and treatment. Testing is often targeted at high-risk groups; workplace events might normalise testing and allow access to a wider population. The construction workforce has a number of risk factors for HIV. In the Test@Work study, HIV tests were delivered within general health checks to construction employees, with high uptake and acceptability. This paper reports on the experiences of construction managers and health professionals involved in Test@Work and explores the suitability of construction worksites as a venue for opt-in HIV testing.
METHODS
Qualitative interviews (n = 24) were conducted with construction managers who had facilitated health check/HIV testing (n = 13), and delivery partners (n = 11) including i) healthcare volunteers who had delivered general health checks (n = 7) and, ii) HIV professionals who had conducted HIV testing (n = 4) at 21 Test@Work events held on construction sites. Interviews explored their experiences of these events and views towards HIV testing in the workplace. Exit questionnaires (n = 107) were completed by delivery partners after every event, providing qualitative data identifying facilitators and barriers to effective delivery. Thematic analysis identified themes that were mapped against a socioecological framework.
RESULTS
Delivery partners reported high engagement of construction workers with workplace HIV testing, peer-to-peer encouragement for uptake, and value for accessibility of onsite testing. HIV professionals valued the opportunity to reach an untested population, many of whom had a poor understanding of their exposure to HIV risk. Managers valued the opportunity to offer workplace health checks to employees but some identified challenges with event planning, or provision of private facilities.
CONCLUSIONS
The construction sector is complex with a largely male workforce. Providing worksite HIV testing and education to an untested population who have poor knowledge about HIV risk helped to normalise testing, encourage uptake and reduce HIV-related stigma. However, there are practical barriers to testing in the construction environment. Rapid testing may not be the most suitable approach given the challenges of maintaining confidentiality on construction worksites and alternatives should be explored.

Identifiants

pubmed: 35870921
doi: 10.1186/s12889-022-13787-5
pii: 10.1186/s12889-022-13787-5
pmc: PMC9308504
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

1409

Informations de copyright

© 2022. The Author(s).

Références

Clin Infect Dis. 2021 Jan 23;72(1):9-14
pubmed: 33035296
Qual Health Res. 2005 Nov;15(9):1277-88
pubmed: 16204405
Sex Transm Infect. 2019 Feb;95(1):43-45
pubmed: 30072393
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 Oct 26;17(21):
pubmed: 33114546
Occup Med (Lond). 2010 Aug;60(5):348-53
pubmed: 20407041
Public Health Rep. 2008 Nov-Dec;123 Suppl 3:94-100
pubmed: 19166093
Sex Transm Infect. 2012 Dec;88(8):601-6
pubmed: 22773329
AIDS Educ Prev. 2012 Dec;24(6):574-81
pubmed: 23206205
HIV Med. 2012 Aug;13(7):416-26
pubmed: 22413900
HIV Med. 2020 Mar;21(3):142-162
pubmed: 31682060
PLoS Med. 2006 Jul;3(7):e238
pubmed: 16796402
J Viral Hepat. 2020 Jan;27(1):88-91
pubmed: 31448490
BMC Infect Dis. 2020 Dec 7;20(1):932
pubmed: 33287723
Diab Vasc Dis Res. 2013 Jul;10(4):337-45
pubmed: 23624762
BMC Public Health. 2014 Jan 13;14:33
pubmed: 24417763
AIDS. 2008 Jan 2;22(1):115-22
pubmed: 18090399
Lancet Psychiatry. 2018 Apr;5(4):303
pubmed: 29580608
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 Jan 06;17(1):
pubmed: 31935985
Public Health. 2018 Mar;156:34-43
pubmed: 29366916
J Occup Environ Med. 2013 Oct;55(10):1197-204
pubmed: 24064778
Lancet HIV. 2015 Jun;2(6):e229-35
pubmed: 26423195
J R Soc Promot Health. 2007 May;127(3):113-8
pubmed: 17542423
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 Sep 18;17(18):
pubmed: 32961985
Health Educ Q. 1988 Winter;15(4):451-72
pubmed: 3230019
Gerontol Geriatr Med. 2020 Jun 17;6:2333721420927948
pubmed: 32596420
Health Educ Q. 1988 Winter;15(4):351-77
pubmed: 3068205
Eur J Public Health. 2013 Dec;23(6):1039-45
pubmed: 23002238
Health Care Women Int. 2003 Jul;24(6):544-51
pubmed: 12851173
Br J Gen Pract. 2014 Feb;64(619):e60-6
pubmed: 24567618
Soc Sci Med. 2017 Sep;188:30-40
pubmed: 28704645
Int J Occup Saf Ergon. 2021 Jun;27(2):472-487
pubmed: 30935301
PLoS One. 2012;7(6):e39530
pubmed: 22745777
J HIV AIDS Soc Serv. 2019;18(3):248-264
pubmed: 33223972
J Health Psychol. 2002 May;7(3):253-67
pubmed: 22114249
BMC Infect Dis. 2021 Sep 13;21(Suppl 2):845
pubmed: 34517830
Sex Transm Infect. 2003 Dec;79(6):442-7
pubmed: 14663117
JMIR Res Protoc. 2021 Nov 1;10(11):e25099
pubmed: 34723826
BMC Public Health. 2013 May 17;13:482
pubmed: 23679953
BMC Public Health. 2018 Oct 22;18(1):1191
pubmed: 30348140
Health Educ Behav. 2012 Jun;39(3):364-72
pubmed: 22267868
J Constr Eng Manag. 2020 Mar;146(3):
pubmed: 33408438
BMC Public Health. 2021 Sep 24;21(1):1737
pubmed: 34560853
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021 Apr 15;18(8):
pubmed: 33920943
BMJ Open. 2020 Nov 5;10(11):e042963
pubmed: 33154064
PLoS One. 2013 Jul 16;8(7):e68495
pubmed: 23874644
Saf Health Work. 2017 Jun;8(2):117-129
pubmed: 28593067
BMC Public Health. 2013 Mar 11;13:220
pubmed: 23497196
Eur J Public Health. 2010 Aug;20(4):422-32
pubmed: 20123683
AIDS Behav. 2020 Oct;24(10):2743-2747
pubmed: 32350772
BMC Public Health. 2020 Nov 4;20(1):1656
pubmed: 33148214
Qual Health Res. 2016 Nov;26(13):1753-1760
pubmed: 26613970
Clin Med (Lond). 2017 Dec;17(6):508-520
pubmed: 29196351
J Public Health (Oxf). 2006 Sep;28(3):248-52
pubmed: 16831957
AIDS Behav. 2012 Aug;16(6):1605-21
pubmed: 22481273
HIV Med. 2016 Mar;17(3):222-30
pubmed: 26919291
Soc Sci Med. 2016 Sep;165:168-176
pubmed: 27511617
Am J Health Promot. 2018 Mar;32(3):795-805
pubmed: 28730841

Auteurs

Sarah Somerset (S)

School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
NIHR Nottingham Biomedical Research Centre, Nottingham, UK.

Wendy Jones (W)

School of Health Sciences, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.

Catrin Evans (C)

School of Health Sciences, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.

Cecilia Cirelli (C)

School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.

Douglas Mbang (D)

School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.

Holly Blake (H)

NIHR Nottingham Biomedical Research Centre, Nottingham, UK. holly.blake@nottingham.ac.uk.
School of Health Sciences, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK. holly.blake@nottingham.ac.uk.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH