Abstract

IntroductionStrategies employing a single rapid diagnostic test (RDT) such as HIV self‐testing (HIVST) or “test for triage” (T4T) are proposed to increase HIV testing programme impact. Current guidelines recommend serial testing with two or three RDTs for HIV diagnosis, followed by retesting with the same algorithm to verify HIV‐positive status before anti‐retroviral therapy (ART) initiation. We investigated whether clients presenting to HIV testing services (HTS) following a single reactive RDT must undergo the diagnostic algorithm twice to diagnose and verify HIV‐positive status, or whether a diagnosis with the setting‐specific algorithm is adequate for ART initiation.MethodsWe calculated (1) expected number of false‐positive (FP) misclassifications per 10,000 HIV negative persons tested, (2) positive predictive value (PPV) of the overall HIV testing strategy compared to the WHO recommended PPV ≥99%, and (3) expected cost per FP misclassified person identified by additional verification testing in a typical low‐/middle‐income setting, compared to the expected lifetime ART cost of $3000. Scenarios considered were as follows: 10% prevalence using two serial RDTs for diagnosis, 1% prevalence using three serial RDTs, and calibration using programmatic data from Malawi in 2017 where the proportion of people testing HIV positive in facilities was 4%.ResultsIn the 10% HIV prevalence setting with a triage test, the expected number of FP misclassifications was 0.86 per 10,000 tested without verification testing and the PPV was 99.9%. In the 1% prevalence setting, expected FP misclassifications were 0.19 with 99.8% PPV, and in the Malawi 2017 calibrated setting the expected misclassifications were 0.08 with 99.98% PPV. The cost per FP identified by verification testing was $5879, $3770, and $24,259 respectively. Results were sensitive to assumptions about accuracy of self‐reported reactive results and whether reactive triage test results influenced biased interpretation of subsequent RDT results by the HTS provider.ConclusionsDiagnosis with the full algorithm following presentation with a reactive triage test is expected to achieve PPV above the 99% threshold. Continuing verification testing prior to ART initiation remains recommended, but HIV testing strategies involving HIVST and T4T may provide opportunities to maintain quality while increasing efficiency as part of broader restructuring of HIV testing service delivery.

Highlights

  • Strategies employing a single rapid diagnostic test (RDT) such as HIV self-testing (HIVST) or “test for triage” (T4T) are proposed to increase HIV testing programme impact

  • We considered additional verification testing “cost-efficient” if the cost per FP misclassification identified was less than the expected lifetime anti-retroviral therapy (ART) cost of $3000

  • Policy analysis from 2015 suggested fewer than 20% of reporting countries had a national testing strategy and algorithm that was in full alignment with WHO guidelines [8]. We considered whether such additional verification testing is required and cost-efficient for clients who already underwent diagnostic testing to confirm their HIV status in HIV testing services (HTS) following a reactive triage test

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Strategies employing a single rapid diagnostic test (RDT) such as HIV self-testing (HIVST) or “test for triage” (T4T) are proposed to increase HIV testing programme impact. We investigated whether clients presenting to HIV testing services (HTS) following a single reactive RDT must undergo the diagnostic algorithm twice to diagnose and verify HIV-positive status, or whether a diagnosis with the setting-specific algorithm is adequate for ART initiation. In 2017, PEPFAR alone conducted more than 85 million HIV tests [1] Despite this scale-up, an estimated 25% of people with HIV remain unaware of their status [2]. Striving for these ambitious targets for HIV diagnosis, while seeking increases in the efficiency and effectiveness of services, has stimulated innovative approaches to providing HTS.

Methods
Findings
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

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

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.