Center for Research on Population and Health, Faculty of Health Sciences, American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon.
BMC Int Health Hum Rights. 2013 Jan 23;13:6. doi: 10.1186/1472-698X-13-6.
The ethical discourse about HIV testing has undergone a profound transformation in recent years. The greater availability of antiretroviral therapy (ART) has led to a global scaling up of HIV testing and counseling as a gateway to prevention, treatment and care. In response, critics raised important ethical questions, including: How do different testing policies and practices undermine or strengthen informed consent and medical confidentiality? How well do different modalities of testing provide benefits that outweigh risks of harm? To what degree do current testing policies and programs provide equitable access to HIV services? And finally, what lessons have been learned from the field about how to improve the delivery of HIV services to achieve public health objectives and protections for human rights? This article reviews the empirical evidence that has emerged to answer these questions, from four sub-Saharan African countries, namely: Burkina Faso, Kenya, Malawi and Uganda.
Expanding access to treatment and prevention in these four countries has made the biomedical benefits of HIV testing increasingly clear. But serious challenges remain with regard to protecting human rights, informed consent and ensuring linkages to care. Policy makers and practitioners are grappling with difficult ethical issues, including how to protect confidentiality, how to strengthen linkages to care, and how to provide equitable access to services, especially for most at risk populations, including men who have sex with men.
The most salient policy questions about HIV testing in these countries no longer address whether to scale up routine PITC (and other strategies), but how. Instead, individuals, health care providers and policy makers are struggling with a host of difficult ethical questions about how to protect rights, maximize benefits, and mitigate risks in the face of resource scarcity.
近年来,艾滋病病毒检测的伦理讨论发生了深刻的变化。抗逆转录病毒疗法(ART)的广泛应用,促使全球扩大了艾滋病病毒检测和咨询服务,将其作为预防、治疗和护理的切入点。对此,批评者提出了一些重要的伦理问题,包括:不同的检测政策和实践如何破坏或加强知情同意和医疗保密?不同的检测方式在多大程度上提供了收益超过伤害风险的好处?现行的检测政策和方案在多大程度上为获得艾滋病毒服务提供了公平的机会?最后,从该领域吸取了哪些经验教训,以改善艾滋病毒服务的提供,实现公共卫生目标和保护人权?本文综述了来自布基纳法索、肯尼亚、马拉维和乌干达四个撒哈拉以南非洲国家的实证证据,以回答这些问题。
在这四个国家扩大治疗和预防措施的覆盖面,使艾滋病毒检测的生物医学益处日益明显。但是,在保护人权、知情同意和确保与护理联系方面仍然存在严重挑战。政策制定者和从业人员正在努力应对一些棘手的伦理问题,包括如何保护保密性,如何加强与护理的联系,以及如何为服务提供公平的机会,特别是为最易受感染的人群,包括男男性接触者。
这些国家关于艾滋病病毒检测的最突出政策问题不再是是否扩大常规 PITC(和其他策略),而是如何扩大。相反,个人、医疗保健提供者和政策制定者正在努力应对一系列棘手的伦理问题,包括如何在资源稀缺的情况下保护权利、最大化收益和减轻风险。