Inghels Maxime, Kim Hae-Young, Mathenjwa Thulile, Shahmanesh Maryam, Seeley Janet, Wyke Sally, McGrath Nuala, Sartorius Benn, Yapa H Manisha, Dobra Adrian, Bärnighausen Till, Tanser Frank
Lincoln International Institute for Rural Health, University of Lincoln, Lincoln, UK; Centre Population et Développement (UMR 196 Paris Descartes - IRD), SageSud (ERL INSERM 1244), Institut de Recherche pour le Développement, Paris, France.
Africa Health Research Institute, KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa; Department of Population Health, New York University School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA; KwaZulu-Natal Innovation and Sequencing Platform, KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa.
Soc Sci Med. 2022 Oct;311:115305. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2022.115305. Epub 2022 Sep 1.
In sub-Saharan Africa, home-based HIV testing interventions are designed to reach sub-populations with low access to HIV testing such as men, younger or less educated people. Combining these interventions with conditional financial incentives (CFI) has been shown to be effective to increase testing uptake. CFI are effective for one-off health behaviour change but whether they operate differentially on different socio-demographic groups is less clear. Using data from the HITS trial in South Africa, we investigated whether a CFI was able to reduce existing home-based HIV testing uptake inequalities observed by socio-demographic groups. Residents aged ≥15 years in the study area were assigned to an intervention arm (16 clusters) or a control arm (29 clusters). In the intervention arm, individuals received a food voucher (∼3.5 US dollars) if they accepted to take a home-based HIV test. Testing uptake differences were considered for socio-demographic (sex, age, education, employment status, marital status, household asset index) and geographical (urban/rural living area, distance from clinic) characteristics. Among the 37,028 residents, 24,793 (9290 men, 15,503 women) were included in the analysis. CFI increased significantly testing uptake among men (39.2% vs 25.2%, p < 0.001) and women (45.9% vs 32.0%, p < 0.001) with similar absolute increase between men and women. Uptake was higher amongst the youngest or least educated individuals, and amongst single (vs in union) or unemployed men. Absolute uptake increase was also significantly higher amongst these groups resulting in increasing socio-demographic differentials for home-based HIV testing uptake. However, because these groups are known to have less access to other public HIV testing services, CFI could reduce inequalities for HIV testing access in our specific context. Although CFI significantly increased home-based HIV testing uptake, it did not do so differentially by socio-demographic group. Future interventions using CFI should make sure that the intervention alone does not increase existing health inequities.
在撒哈拉以南非洲地区,居家艾滋病毒检测干预措施旨在覆盖那些获得艾滋病毒检测机会较少的亚人群体,如男性、年轻人或受教育程度较低的人群。事实证明,将这些干预措施与有条件的经济激励措施(CFI)相结合,可有效提高检测参与率。CFI对一次性健康行为改变有效,但它们在不同社会人口群体中的作用是否存在差异尚不清楚。利用南非HITS试验的数据,我们调查了CFI是否能够减少社会人口群体中现有的居家艾滋病毒检测参与率不平等现象。研究区域内年龄≥15岁的居民被分配到干预组(16个群组)或对照组(29个群组)。在干预组中,个体若接受居家艾滋病毒检测,将获得一张食品券(约3.5美元)。研究考虑了社会人口学特征(性别、年龄、教育程度、就业状况、婚姻状况、家庭资产指数)和地理特征(城乡居住地区、距诊所的距离)对检测参与率的差异。在37,028名居民中,24,793人(9290名男性,15,503名女性)纳入分析。CFI显著提高了男性(39.2%对25.2%,p<0.001)和女性(45.9%对32.0%,p<0.001)的检测参与率,男性和女性的绝对增长率相似。最年轻或受教育程度最低的个体以及单身(相对于已婚)或失业男性的检测参与率更高。这些群体中的绝对参与率增幅也显著更高,导致居家艾滋病毒检测参与率的社会人口学差异加大。然而,由于已知这些群体获得其他公共艾滋病毒检测服务的机会较少,在我们的特定背景下,CFI可减少艾滋病毒检测机会的不平等现象。尽管CFI显著提高了居家艾滋病毒检测参与率,但在不同社会人口群体中并无差异。未来使用CFI的干预措施应确保仅干预措施本身不会加剧现有的健康不平等现象。