Abstract

BackgroundLarge geographical variations in the intensity of the HIV epidemic in sub-Saharan Africa call for geographically targeted resource allocation where burdens are greatest. However, data available for mapping the geographic variability of HIV prevalence and detecting HIV ‘hotspots’ is scarce, and population-based surveillance data are not always available. Here, we evaluated the viability of using clinic-based HIV prevalence data to measure the spatial variability of HIV in South Africa and Tanzania.MethodsPopulation-based and clinic-based HIV data from a small HIV hyper-endemic rural community in South Africa as well as for the country of Tanzania were used to map smoothed HIV prevalence using kernel interpolation techniques. Spatial variables were included in clinic-based models using co-kriging methods to assess whether cofactors improve clinic-based spatial HIV prevalence predictions. Clinic- and population-based smoothed prevalence maps were compared using partial rank correlation coefficients and residual local indicators of spatial autocorrelation.ResultsRoutinely-collected clinic-based data captured most of the geographical heterogeneity described by population-based data but failed to detect some pockets of high prevalence. Analyses indicated that clinic-based data could accurately predict the spatial location of so-called HIV ‘hotspots’ in > 50% of the high HIV burden areas.ConclusionClinic-based data can be used to accurately map the broad spatial structure of HIV prevalence and to identify most of the areas where the burden of the infection is concentrated (HIV ‘hotspots’). Where population-based data are not available, HIV data collected from health facilities may provide a second-best option to generate valid spatial prevalence estimates for geographical targeting and resource allocation.

Highlights

  • Large geographical variations in the intensity of the Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) epidemic in sub-Saharan Africa call for geographically targeted resource allocation where burdens are greatest

  • We address the following question: can routinely collected and readily available HIV testing data, such as those collected from healthcare facilities, be used to accurately map the broad spatial structure of the HIV epidemic? To assess whether clinic-based HIV data accurately capture the spatial structure of HIV prevalence and to identify the so-called ‘hotspots’ of infection, we conducted a series of spatial statistical analyses at two different geographical scales, thereby offering a potentially rapid and inexpensive approach to understanding the spatial structure of HIV epidemics across differently geographic scales

  • A Partial rank correlation coefficient (PRCC) comparisons between population-based data and clinic-based data estimations b Percentage of area where the local indicator of spatial autocorrelation (LISA) estimations comparisons between population-based data and clinic-based data estimations were consistent with statistical significance c Percentage of area where the local indicator of spatial autocorrelation (LISA) estimations comparisons between population-based data and clinic-based data estimations were inconsistent with statistical significance d Percentage of areas with HIV prevalence in the upper quintile detected by the mode

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Large geographical variations in the intensity of the HIV epidemic in sub-Saharan Africa call for geographically targeted resource allocation where burdens are greatest. Some international agencies such as USAID’s Demographic and Health Survey (DHS) collect nationally representative population-based epidemiologic data from resource limited settings [1], but the surveys are not routinely conducted, and spatial data are not available for several countries where the surveys are implemented Other surveillance systems such as the Africa Centre Demographic Information System (ACDIS), or the Centre for the AIDS Programme of Research in South Africa (CAPRISA) include spatial information, but they are conducted in selected micro-geographical areas, limiting the generalizability of their findings to other settings or to larger geographical scales

Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call