Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Rapid HIV testing may circumvent the practical barriers to HIV testing in several settings. User preference of the testing kits available has been relatively underexplored. We examined healthcare provider (HCP) ratings of two validated rapid testing kits in clinical practice. From 1 July to 1 December 2012 we prospectively recruited HCPs (clinic nurses) from three outpatient clinics linked to Lausanne University Hospital, Lausanne, Switzerland. The HCPs had experience in taking blood samples but varying experience in rapid HIV testing. Participating HCPs performed rapid HIV testing using Determine™ Combo (DETE) or INSTI™ (INSTI), according to a predefined randomization sequence, and rated practical aspects of each test using a Likert scale. Seventeen HCPs of 23 approached (74%) were eligible and agreed to participate, performing a total of 336 HIV tests. Globally, the testing procedure was rated as easy or very easy by 97% (DETE) to 99% (INSTI) of tests performed. Among experienced HCPs, DETE was rated easier than INSTI for kit storage (p < 0.001) and blood collection (P = 0.012) while INSTI was rated easier than DETE for blood application (P = 0.001) and test interpretation (P = 0.005). Among less experienced HCPs, both tests performed equally with the exception of test interpretation (P < 0.001) and overall ease of use (P = 0.05) in favour of INSTI. Of all HCPs, 94% stated they would recommend INSTI over DETE based on the time to result, ease of test interpretation and overall ease of use. Rapid HIV testing was considered easy to perform, even by inexperienced nursing staff. Whilst both tests were considered easy to use, the HCPs in this study preferred INSTI to DETE overall, due to rapid time to result, ease of test interpretation and general ease of use.

Keywords

HIV testing point-of-care test rapid HIV testing kit preference

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

UNAIDS. Fast track: ending the AIDS epidemic by 2030. Geneva: UNAIDS 2015, http://www.unaids.org/sites/default/files/media_asset/JC2686_WAD2014report_en.pdf; 2014 (accessed 14 September 2016).

Branson

Handsfield

Lampe

et al.

Revised recommendations for HIV testing of adults, adolescents, and pregnant women in health-care settings. MMWR Recomm Rep 2006; 55: 1–17. quiz CE11-14.

Moyer VA, Force* USPST. Screening for HIV: U.S. Preventive services task force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med 2013; 159: 51–60.

Burke

Sepkowitz

Bernstein

et al.

Why don’t physicians test for HIV? A review of the US literature. AIDS 2007; 21: 1617–1624.

Bares

Steinbeck

Bence

et al.

Knowledge, attitudes, and ordering patterns for routine HIV screening among resident physicians at an urban medical center. J Int Assoc Provid AIDS Care 2014; 4: 320–327.

Schnall

Clark

Olender

et al.

Providers’ perceptions of the factors influencing the implementation of the New York State mandatory HIV testing law in two Urban academic emergency departments. Acad Emerg Med 2013; 20: 279–286.

Arbelaez

Wright

Losina

et al.

Emergency provider attitudes and barriers to universal HIV testing in the emergency department. J Emerg Med 2012; 42: 7–14.

European monitoring centre for drugs and drug addiction: treatment and care for older drug users, http://www.emcdda.europa.eu/attachements.cfm/att_120120_EN_EMCDDA_SI10_Ageing.pdf (2010, accessed 4 October 2016).

Pavie

Rachline

Loze

et al.

Sensitivity of five rapid HIV tests on oral fluid or finger-stick whole blood: a real-time comparison in a healthcare setting. PLoS One 2010; 5: e11581–e11581.

10.

Moshgabadi

Galli

Daly

et al.

Sensitivity of a rapid point of care assay for early HIV antibody detection is enhanced by its ability to detect HIV gp41 IgM antibodies. J Clin Virol 2015; 71: 67–72.

11.

Galli

Green

La Marca

et al.

Evaluation of the accuracy and ease of use of a rapid HIV-1 Antibody Test performed by untrained operators at the point of care. J Clin Virol 2013; 58: e65–e69.

12.

Office fédéral de la santé publique. Dépistage du VIH effectué sur l’initiative des médecins: recommandations pour les patients adultes. Bull l’OFSP 2010; 11/10: 364–366.

13.

Lewis

Macpherson

Adams

et al.

Field accuracy of fourth-generation rapid diagnostic tests for acute HIV-1: a systematic review. AIDS 2015; 29: 2465–2471.

14.

Agresti A. Categorical data analysis, https://mathdept.iut.ac.ir/sites/mathdept.iut.ac.ir/files/AGRESTI.PDF (2002, accessed 20 June 2017).

15.

Belza

Rosales-Statkus

Hoyos

et al.

Supervised blood-based self-sample collection and rapid test performance: a valuable alternative to the use of saliva by HIV testing programmes with no medical or nursing staff. Sex Transm Infect 2012; 88: 218–221.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.15 MB

0.16 MB

A prospective multicentre study of healthcare provider preference in rapid HIV testing kits: Determine versus INSTI

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References

Supplementary Material