English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Background  Like other countries, Tanzania instituted mobile and outreach testing approaches to address low HIV testing rates at health facilities and enhance linkage to care. Available evidence from hard-to-reach rural settings of Mbeya region, Tanzania suggests that clients testing HIV+ at facility-based sites are more likely to link to care, and to link sooner, than those testing at mobile sites. This paper (1) describes the populations accessing HIV testing at mobile/outreach and facility-based testing sites, and (2) compares processes and dynamics from testing to linkage to care between these two testing models from the same study context.    Methods  An explanatory sequential mixed-method study (a) reviewed records of all clients (n = 11,773) testing at 8 mobile and 8 facility-based testing sites over 6 months; (b), reviewed guidelines; (c) observed HIV testing sites (n = 10) and Care and Treatment Centers (CTCs) (n = 8); (d) applied questionnaires at 0, 3 and 6 months to a cohort of 1012 HIV newly-diagnosed clients from the 16 sites; and (e) conducted focus group discussions (n = 8) and in-depth qualitative interviews with cohort members (n = 10) and health care providers (n = 20).    Results  More clients tested at mobile/outreach than facility-based sites (56% vs 44% of 11,733, p < 0.001). Mobile site clients were more likely to be younger and male (p < 0.001). More clients testing at facility sites were HIV positive (21.5% vs. 7.9% of 11,733, p < 0.001). All sites in both testing models adhered to national HIV testing and care guidelines. Staff at mobile sites showed more proactive efforts to support linkage to care, and clients report favouring the confidentiality of mobile sites to avoid stigma. Clients who tested at mobile/outreach sites faced longer delays and waiting times at treatment sites (CTCs).    Conclusions  Rural mobile/outreach HIV testing sites reach more people than facility based sites but they reach a different clientèle which is less likely to be HIV +ve and appears to be less “linkage-ready”. Despite more proactive care and confidentiality at mobile sites, linkage to care is worse than for clients who tested at facility-based sites. Our findings highlight a combination of (a) patient-level factors, including stigma; and (b) well-established procedures and routines for each step between testing and initiation of treatment in facility-based sites. Long waiting times at treatment sites are a further barrier that must be addressed.

aids research and therapy

Processes and dynamics of linkage to care from mobile/outreach and facility-based HIV testing models in hard-to-reach settings in rural Tanzania. Qualitative findings of a mixed methods study