Partner-delivered HIV self-test kits with and without financial incentives in antenatal care and index patients with HIV in Malawi: a three-arm, cluster-randomised controlled trial.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Choko AT
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8220130 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Jul
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Partner-delivered HIV self-test kits with and without financial incentives in antenatal care and index patients with HIV in Malawi: a three-arm, cluster-randomised controlled trial.
Choko Augustine T AT Fielding Katherine K Johnson Cheryl C CC Kumwenda Moses K MK Chilongosi Richard R Baggaley Rachel C RC Nyirenda Rose R Sande Linda A LA Desmond Nicola N Hatzold Karin K Neuman Melissa M Corbett Elizabeth L EL
The Lancet. Global health 20210701 7
<h4>Background</h4>Secondary distribution of HIV self-testing (HIVST) kits by patients attending clinic services to their partners could improve the rate of HIV diagnosis. We aimed to investigate whether secondary administration of HIVST kits, with or without an additional financial incentive, via women receiving antenatal care (ANC) or via people newly diagnosed with HIV (ie, index patients) could improve the proportion of male partners tested or the number of people newly diagnosed with HIV.<h ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC6314606 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceAlthough breastfeeding has a positive effect on an infant's health and development, the prevalence is low in many communities. The effect of financial incentives to improve breastfeeding prevalence is unknown.ObjectiveTo assess the effect of an area-level financial incentive for breastfeeding on breastfeeding prevalence at 6 to 8 weeks post partum.Design, setting, and participantsThe Nourishing Start for Health (NOSH) trial, a cluster randomized trial with 6 to 8 weeks follow-up, was conducted between April 1, 2015, and March 31, 2016, in 92 electoral ward areas in England with baseline breastfeeding prevalence at 6 to 8 weeks post partum less than 40%. A total of 10 010 mother-infant dyads resident in the 92 study electoral ward areas where the infant's estimated or actual birth date fell between February 18, 2015, and February 17, 2016, were included. Areas were randomized to the incentive plus usual care (n = 46) (5398 mother-infant dyads) or to usual care alone (n = 46) (4612 mother-infant dyads).InterventionsUsual care was delivered by clinicians (mainly midwives, health visitors) in a variety of maternity, neonatal, and infant feeding services, all of which were implementing the UNICEF UK Baby Friendly Initiative standards. Shopping vouchers worth £40 (US$50) were offered to mothers 5 times based on infant age (2 days, 10 days, 6-8 weeks, 3 months, 6 months), conditional on the infant receiving any breast milk.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was electoral ward area-level 6- to 8-week breastfeeding period prevalence, as assessed by clinicians at the routine 6- to 8-week postnatal check visit. Secondary outcomes were area-level period prevalence for breastfeeding initiation and for exclusive breastfeeding at 6 to 8 weeks.ResultsIn the intervention (5398 mother-infant dyads) and control (4612 mother-infant dyads) group, the median (interquartile range) percentage of women aged 16 to 44 years was 36.2% (3.0%) and 37.4% (3.6%) years, respectively. After adjusting for baseline breastfeeding prevalence and local government area and weighting to reflect unequal cluster-level breastfeeding prevalence variances, a difference in mean 6- to 8-week breastfeeding prevalence of 5.7 percentage points (37.9% vs 31.7%; 95% CI for adjusted difference, 2.7% to 8.6%; P < .001) in favor of the intervention vs usual care was observed. No significant differences were observed for the mean prevalence of breastfeeding initiation (61.9% vs 57.5%; adjusted mean difference, 2.9 percentage points; 95%, CI, -0.4 to 6.2; P = .08) or the mean prevalence of exclusive breastfeeding at 6 to 8 weeks (27.0% vs 24.1%; adjusted mean difference, 2.3 percentage points; 95% CI, -0.2 to 4.8; P = .07).Conclusions and relevanceFinancial incentives may improve breastfeeding rates in areas with low baseline prevalence. Offering a financial incentive to women in areas of England with breastfeeding rates below 40% compared with usual care resulted in a modest but statistically significant increase in breastfeeding prevalence at 6 to 8 weeks. This was measured using routinely collected data.Trial registrationInternational Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Registry: ISRCTN44898617.
| S-EPMC5839268 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportancePrior studies found that financial incentives have small, positive direct effects in increasing COVID-19 vaccination rates, but unmeasured social spillovers (ie, changes in outcomes among untreated individuals who are socially exposed to policy beneficiaries) may diminish the overall effect of such policies.ObjectiveTo assess the spillover effects of a COVID-19 vaccination financial incentive and assess whether incorporating estimates of spillover meaningfully affects broader evaluations of policy effectiveness.Design, setting, and participantsThis population-level, address-cluster randomized clinical trial was conducted in November 2021. Participants were all adult (aged ≥18 years) residents of Ravensburg, Germany, who were randomly assigned to the treatment or control group. One resident in each address cluster was randomly selected to be an address-cluster representative. Address-cluster representatives in the treatment group received the treatment letter; all other cohabitants at that same address received the control letter. All individuals in addresses randomly assigned to the control group were mailed a control letter. Intention-to-treat data analysis was conducted from January 2022 to May 2024.InterventionControl letters informed recipients about 7 upcoming free COVID-19 vaccination events. Treatment letters were identical to control letters, except they also offered €40 (US $41.46) for getting vaccinated at one of the events.Main outcome and measurePrimary and booster COVID-19 vaccination uptake was observed and recorded on site during the public vaccination events. Primary vaccinations were defined as either the first dose of a 1-dose vaccine or the first or second dose of a 2-doses vaccine. Boosters were defined as any dose after primary vaccination. Three types of commonly used treatment effects were analyzed: direct, spillover, and overall.ResultsAmong 41 548 Ravensburg residents (mean [SD] age, 49.96 [19.04] years; 51.3% female), 796 (1.9%) were vaccinated at 1 of the 7 public vaccination events. The direct, spillover, and overall effects of receiving a financial incentive on primary vaccinations were all nonsignificant. For booster vaccinations, the direct effect was negative but not statistically significant (-0.32 percentage points [95% CI, -0.77 to 0.14 percentage points]; P = .17), whereas the overall effect (-0.30 percentage points [95% CI, -0.51 to -0.09 percentage points]; P = .006) was significantly negative. The spillover effect was significantly negative (-0.29 percentage points [95% CI, -0.53 to -0.06 percentage points]; P = .01), but only for the first vaccination events.Conclusions and relevanceThis trial found null direct effects on COVID-19 vaccination uptake and negative effects on booster uptake among individuals who did not receive but were indirectly exposed to the financial incentives. The timing of this spillover suggests that cohabitants of financial incentive recipients postponed booster vaccination, thereby undermining the potential effectiveness of this policy.Trial registrationISRCTN identifier: ISRCTN59503725.
| S-EPMC11806395 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundFinancial incentives can motivate desirable health behaviors, including adult HIV testing. Data regarding the effectiveness of financial incentives for HIV testing in children, who require urgent testing to prevent mortality, are lacking.MethodsIn a five-arm unblinded randomized controlled trial, adults living with HIV attending 19 HIV clinics in Western Kenya, with children 0-12 years of unknown HIV status, were randomized with equal allocation to $0, $1.25, $2.50, $5 or $10. Payment was conditional on child HIV testing within 2 months. Block randomization with fixed block sizes was used; participants and study staff were unblinded at randomization. Primary analysis was intent-to-treat, with predefined primary outcomes of completing child HIV testing and time to testing.ResultsOf 452 caregivers, 90, 89, 93, 92 and 88 were randomized to $0, $1.25, $2.50, $5.00, and $10.00, respectively. Of those, 31 (34%), 31 (35%), 44 (47%), 51 (55%), and 54 (61%) in the $0, $1.25, $2.50, $5.00, and $10.00 arms, respectively, completed child testing. Compared with the $0 arm, and adjusted for site, caregivers in the $10.00 arm had significantly higher uptake of testing [relative risk: 1.80 (95% CI 1.15--2.80), P = 0.010]. Compared with the $0 arm, and adjusted for site, time to testing was significantly faster in the $5.00 and $10.00 arms [hazard ratio: 1.95 (95% CI 1.24--3.07) P = 0.004, 2.42 (95% CI 1.55--3.79), P < 0.001, respectively).ConclusionFinancial incentives are effective in improving pediatric HIV testing among caregivers living with HIV.RegistrationNCT03049917.
| S-EPMC7791594 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PURPOSE OF REVIEW:We reviewed recent literature on conditional and unconditional financial incentives for their impact on improving movement through the HIV care cascade and HIV prevention. RECENT FINDINGS:Concepts from behavioral economics may help improve engagement in HIV care by addressing upstream structural risk factors for HIV, such as poverty, or providing conditional rewards for immediate, measurable outcomes related to HIV care. Incentives have been shown to increase uptake of HIV testing. Yet, few studies to date focus on linkage to care: one large USA-based randomized trial failed to show an effect of incentives; and a smaller trial showed improved linkage to care among drug users, but no difference in virologic suppression. Several small USA-based studies have shown an impact of financial incentives on antiretroviral therapy adherence, but without durability beyond the incentive period. HIV prevention has the most robust evidence for decreasing HIV risk-taking behavior among adolescents and may serve as a model for research on the care cascade. SUMMARY:Financial incentives show promise for improving engagement in HIV testing, care, and prevention. Understanding the durability, scalability, ease of implementation, and cost-effectiveness of these different approaches will be critical for maximizing the impact of incentives in curtailing the HIV epidemic.
| S-EPMC4699403 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundFinancial incentives promote use of HIV services and might support adherence to the sustained antiretroviral therapy (ART) necessary for viral suppression, but few studies have assessed a biomarker of adherence or evaluated optimal implementation. We sought to determine whether varying sized financial incentives for clinic attendance effected viral suppression in patients starting ART in Tanzania.MethodsIn a three-arm, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial at four health facilities in Shinyanga region, Tanzania, adults aged 18 years or older with HIV who had started ART within the past 30 days were randomly assigned (1:1:1) using a tablet-based application (stratified by site) to receive usual care (control group) or to receive a cash incentive for monthly clinic attendance in one of two amounts: 10 000 Tanzanian Shillings (TZS; about US$4·50) or 22 500 TZS (about $10·00). There were no formal exclusion criteria. Participants were masked to the existence of two incentive sizes. Incentives were provided for up to 6 months via mobile health technology (mHealth) that linked biometric attendance monitoring to automated mobile payments. We evaluated the primary outcome of retention in care with viral suppression (<1000 copies per mL) at 6 months using logistic regression. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03351556.FindingsBetween April 24 and Dec 14, 2018, 530 participants were randomly assigned to an incentive strategy (184 in the control group, 172 in the smaller incentive group, and 174 in the larger incentive group). All participants were included in the primary intention-to-treat analysis. At 6 months, approximately 134 (73%) participants in the control group remained in care and had viral suppression, compared with 143 (83%) in the smaller incentive group (risk difference [RD] 9·8, 95% CI 1·2 to 18·5) and 150 (86%) in the larger incentive group (RD 13·0, 4·5 to 21·5); we identified a positive trend between incentive size and viral suppression (p trend=0·0032), although the incentive groups did not significantly differ (RD 3·2, -4·6 to 11·0). Adverse events included seven (4%) deaths in the control group and 11 (3%) deaths in the intervention groups, none related to study participation.InterpretationSmall financial incentives delivered using mHealth can improve retention in care and viral suppression in adults starting HIV treatment. Although further research should investigate the durability of effects from short-term incentives, these findings strengthen the evidence for implementing financial incentives within standard HIV care.FundingNational Institute of Mental Health at the US National Institutes of Health.
| S-EPMC7606811 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundUndiagnosed HIV and schistosomiasis are highly prevalent among fishermen in the African Great Lakes region. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of lakeside interventions integrating services for HIV and male genital schistosomiasis on the prevalence of schistosomiasis, uptake of antiretroviral therapy (ART) for HIV, and voluntary male medical circumcision (VMMC) among fishermen in Malawi.MethodsWe conducted a three-arm, cluster-randomised trial in 45 lakeshore fishing communities (clusters) in Mangochi, Malawi. Clusters were defined geographically by their home community as the place where fishermen leave their boats (ie, a landing site). Eligible participants were male fishermen (aged ≥18 years) who resided in a cluster. Clusters were randomly allocated (1:1:1) through computer-generated random numbers to either enhanced standard of care (SOC), which offered invitation with information leaflets to a beach clinic offering HIV testing and referral, and presumptive treatment for schistosomiasis with praziquantel; peer education (PE), in which a nominated fisherman was responsible for explaining the study leaflet to promote services to his boat crew; or peer distribution education (PDE), in which the peer educator explained the leaflet and distributed HIV self-test kits to his boat crew. The beach clinic team and fishermen were not masked to intervention allocation; however, investigators were masked until the final analysis. Coprimary composite outcomes were the proportion of participants who had at least one Schistosoma haematobium egg observed on light microscopy from 10 mL of urine filtrate and the proportion who had self-reported initiating ART or scheduling VMMC by day 28. Outcomes were analysed by intention to treat; multiple imputation for missing outcomes was done; random-effect binomial models adjusting for baseline imbalance and clustering were used to compute unadjusted and adjusted risk differences, risk ratios (RRs) and 95% CIs, and intracluster correlation coefficients for each outcome. This trial is registered with ISRCTN, ISRCTN14354324.FindingsBetween March 1, 2022, and Jan 29, 2023, 45 (65·2%) of 69 clusters assessed for eligibility were enrolled in the trial, with 15 clusters per arm. Of the 6036 fishermen screened at baseline, 5207 (86·3%) were eligible for participation: 1745 (87·6%) of 1991 in the enhanced SOC group, 1687 (81·9%) of 2061 in the PE group, and 1775 (89·5%) of 1984 in the PDE group. Compared with the prevalence of active schistosomiasis in the enhanced SOC group (292 [16·7%] of 1745), 241 (13·6%) of 1775 fishermen in the PDE group (adjusted RR 0·80 [95% CI 0·69-0·94]; p=0·0054) and 263 (15·6%) of 1687 fishermen in the PE group (0·92 [0·79-1·07]; p=0·28) had schistosomiasis at day 28. 230 (13·2%) in the enhanced SOC group, 281 (16·7%) in the PE group, and 215 (12·1%) in the PDE group initiated ART or were scheduled for VMMC. ART initiation or VMMC scheduling was not significantly increased with the PDE intervention (0·88 [0·74-1·05); p=0·15) and was marginally increased with the PE intervention (1·16 [0·99-1·37]; p=0·069) when compared with the enhanced SOC group. No serious adverse events were reported in this trial.InterpretationWe found weak evidence for the use of peer education to increase uptake of ART and VMMC, but strong evidence for the added distribution of HIV self-test kits to promote high engagement with services and reduce the prevalence of active schistosomiasis, suggesting a high potential for scale-up in hard-to-reach communities across Malawi.FundingWellcome Trust and the UK National Institute for Health Research.
| S-EPMC11420466 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundTo meet global targets for the elimination of mother-to-child HIV transmission, tailored approaches to HIV testing strategies need prioritizing. Herein, we sought to identify individual-level factors associated with male partner HIV testing.MethodsWe conducted a secondary analysis of data from two parallel randomized trials of pregnant women living with HIV and those HIV-negative in Lusaka, Zambia. Across both trials, control groups received partner notification services only, while intervention groups received partner notification services plus HIV self-test kits for their partners. Associations between baseline factors and male partner testing were estimated using a probability difference. The outcome of interest was uptake of male partner HIV testing of any kind within 30 days of randomization.ResultsThe parent study enrolled 326 participants. Among the 151 women in the control groups, no clear associations were noted between maternal or male partner characteristics and reported uptake of male partner HIV testing. There were positive trends favouring partner testing among women who completed primary school education, had larger households (>2 members), and whose partners were circumcised. Likewise, no clear predictors of male partner testing were identified among the 149 women in the intervention groups. However, negative trends favouring no testing were noted among older, multiparous women from larger households.ConclusionNo consistent predictors for male partner HIV testing across two compared strategies were observed. Our findings suggest that differentiated strategies for male partner HIV testing may not be necessary. Instead, consideration should be given to universal approaches when bringing such services to scale.
| S-EPMC10652660 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundFrequent retesting for HIV among persons at increased risk of HIV infection is critical to early HIV diagnosis of persons and delivery of combination HIV prevention services. There are few evidence-based interventions for promoting frequent retesting for HIV. We sought to determine the effectiveness of financial incentives and deposit contracts in promoting quarterly HIV retesting among adults at increased risk of HIV.Methods and findingsIn peri-urban Ugandan communities from October to December 2018, we randomized HIV-negative adults with self-reported risk to 1 of 3 strategies to promote HIV retesting: (1) no incentive; (2) cash incentives (US$7) for retesting at 3 and 6 months (total US$14); or (3) deposit contracts: participants could voluntarily deposit US$6 at baseline and at 3 months that would be returned with interest (total US$7) upon retesting at 3 and 6 months (total US$14) or lost if participants failed to retest. The primary outcome was retesting for HIV at both 3 and 6 months. Of 1,482 persons screened for study eligibility following community-based recruitment, 524 participants were randomized to either no incentive (N = 180), incentives (N = 172), or deposit contracts (N = 172): median age was 25 years (IQR: 22 to 30), 44% were women, and median weekly income was US$13.60 (IQR: US$8.16 to US$21.76). Among participants randomized to deposit contracts, 24/172 (14%) made a baseline deposit, and 2/172 (1%) made a 3-month deposit. In intent-to-treat analyses, HIV retesting at both 3 and 6 months was significantly higher in the incentive arm (89/172 [52%]) than either the control arm (33/180 [18%], odds ratio (OR) 4.8, 95% CI: 3.0 to 7.7, p < 0.001) or the deposit contract arm (28/172 [16%], OR 5.5, 95% CI: 3.3 to 9.1, p < 0.001). Among those in the deposit contract arm who made a baseline deposit, 20/24 (83%) retested at 3 months; 11/24 (46%) retested at both 3 and 6 months. Among 282 participants who retested for HIV during the trial, three (1%; 95%CI: 0.2 to 3%) seroconverted: one in the incentive group and two in the control group. Study limitations include measurement of retesting at the clinic where baseline enrollment occurred, only offering clinic-based (rather than community-based) HIV retesting and lack of measurement of retesting after completion of the trial to evaluate sustained retesting behavior.ConclusionsOffering financial incentives to high-risk adults in Uganda resulted in significantly higher HIV retesting. Deposit contracts had low uptake and overall did not increase retesting. As part of efforts to increase early diagnosis of HIV among high-risk populations, strategic use of incentives to promote retesting should receive greater consideration by HIV programs.Trial registrationclinicaltrials.gov: NCT02890459.
| S-EPMC8131095 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We implemented a clustered randomized controlled trial with 6,963 residents in six rural Ghana districts to estimate the causal impact of financial incentives on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination uptake. Villages randomly received one of four video treatment arms: a placebo, a standard health message, a high cash incentive (60 Ghana cedis) and a low cash incentive (20 Ghana cedis). For the first co-primary outcome-COVID-19 vaccination intentions-non-vaccinated participants assigned to the cash incentive treatments had an average rate of 81% (1,733 of 2,168) compared to 71% (1,895 of 2,669) for those in the placebo treatment arm. For the other co-primary outcome of self-reported vaccinations 2 months after the initial intervention, the average rate for participants in the cash treatment was 3.5% higher than for participants in the placebo treatment (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.001, 6.9; P = 0.045): 40% (602 of 1,486) versus 36.3% (672 of 1,850). We also verified vaccination status of participants: in the cash treatment arm, 36.6% (355 of 1,058) of verified participants had at least one dose of the COVID-19 vaccine compared to 30.3% (439 of 1,544) for those in the placebo-a difference of 6.3% (95% CI: 2.4, 10.2; P = 0.001). For the intention and the vaccination outcomes, the low cash incentive (20 Ghana cedis) had a larger positive effect on COVID-19 vaccine uptake than the high cash incentive (60 Ghana cedis). Trial identifier: AEARCTR-0008775 .
| S-EPMC10719106 | biostudies-literature