Partner Characteristics and HIV Outcomes among Partners Reached by Phone vs. In-person for Assisted Partner Services in Western Kenya.
Journal
Sexually transmitted diseases
ISSN: 1537-4521
Titre abrégé: Sex Transm Dis
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 7705941
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
24 Sep 2024
24 Sep 2024
Historique:
medline:
24
9
2024
pubmed:
24
9
2024
entrez:
24
9
2024
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
Assisted partner services (APS) is an effective strategy for testing people with undiagnosed HIV but there is limited information on the relative reach and effectiveness of phone versus in-person contact. We analyzed data from 31 facilities in Western Kenya providing APS to female index clients newly HIV-diagnosed, their male partners, and female partners of men newly HIV-diagnosed. APS providers attempted contacting partners using phone first and, if unsuccessful, in-person in the community. Using log-linear mixed models, we estimated relative risks (RR) between phone being the final contact method and partner characteristics and HIV outcomes. From May 2018-March 2020, 2534 female index clients named 7614 male partners, of whom 772 (10.1%) tested positive and named an additional 4956 non-index female partners. Of 11,912 (94.7%) partners reached, 5179 (43.5%) were via phone and 6733 (56.5%) in-person. Of 8076 testing-eligible partners, 99.7% tested and 11.2% first-time tested. Of those tested, 13.1% were newly-diagnosed, of whom 87.0% linked to care. Newly-diagnosed partners were less likely to have been reached by phone vs. in-person (9.8% vs. 15.9%; adjusted RR:0.61, 95%CI:0.53-0.70). Being reached by phone was not significantly associated with testing, first-time testing, or linkage to care. In an APS program that reached 94% of elicited partners, fewer than half were successfully contacted by phone. A combined phone and in-person approach is likely essential for equitable, effective APS.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Assisted partner services (APS) is an effective strategy for testing people with undiagnosed HIV but there is limited information on the relative reach and effectiveness of phone versus in-person contact.
METHODS
METHODS
We analyzed data from 31 facilities in Western Kenya providing APS to female index clients newly HIV-diagnosed, their male partners, and female partners of men newly HIV-diagnosed. APS providers attempted contacting partners using phone first and, if unsuccessful, in-person in the community. Using log-linear mixed models, we estimated relative risks (RR) between phone being the final contact method and partner characteristics and HIV outcomes.
RESULTS
RESULTS
From May 2018-March 2020, 2534 female index clients named 7614 male partners, of whom 772 (10.1%) tested positive and named an additional 4956 non-index female partners. Of 11,912 (94.7%) partners reached, 5179 (43.5%) were via phone and 6733 (56.5%) in-person. Of 8076 testing-eligible partners, 99.7% tested and 11.2% first-time tested. Of those tested, 13.1% were newly-diagnosed, of whom 87.0% linked to care. Newly-diagnosed partners were less likely to have been reached by phone vs. in-person (9.8% vs. 15.9%; adjusted RR:0.61, 95%CI:0.53-0.70). Being reached by phone was not significantly associated with testing, first-time testing, or linkage to care.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
In an APS program that reached 94% of elicited partners, fewer than half were successfully contacted by phone. A combined phone and in-person approach is likely essential for equitable, effective APS.
Identifiants
pubmed: 39316154
doi: 10.1097/OLQ.0000000000002080
pii: 00007435-990000000-00411
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2024 American Sexually Transmitted Diseases Association. All rights reserved.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Conflicts of Interest and Sources of Funding: There are no conflicts of interest to report for all authors. This study was funded by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases of the National Institutes of Health (grant number R01 AI134130). Additional support was provided by the University of Washington/Fred Hutch Center for AIDS Research, an NIH-funded program (P30 AI027757).