The DOI matches its Crossref record; the references it cites are not checked yet.
Assisted partner notification services for patients receiving HIV care and treatment in an HIV clinic in Nairobi, Kenya: a qualitative assessment of barriers and opportunities for scale‐up
Open accessAbstract
Introduction: Identifying HIV‐positive individuals is increasingly recognized as one of the most important and most challenging of the UNAIDS 90‐90‐90 goals. Assisted partner notification services (aPNS) involves tracing and offering HIV testing to partners of HIV‐positive individuals, and is effective and safe when provided to newly diagnosed HIV‐positive patients. Voluntary aPNS is now part of the World Health Organization's guidelines for HIV prevention and care. However, uptake of aPNS is significantly lower among adults with established HIV infection already engaged in care compared to newly diagnosed individuals. We sought to describe barriers encountered and potential opportunities to providing aPNS to established patients living with HIV. Methods: We conducted focus group discussions and in‐depth interviews at Nairobi's largest public HIV clinic in April to May 2016 to elucidate barriers to and opportunities for aPNS among established patients engaged in HIV care. Participants included HIV‐positive adults in care, their partners, and healthcare workers (HCWs). Qualitative data analysis took a grounded theory approach. Results: Barriers to aPNS fell under three main categories. Fear of disclosure to partners included concerns over relationship repercussions, loss of trust, blame and violence. Stigma and discrimination were described in the healthcare setting, at church and in general society. Participants described difficulties approaching communication, including cultural barriers and differences in education. For almost every barrier a potential solution was also identified, and a barrier‐opportunity relationship emerged. Opportunities included using couples testing centres to aid in disclosure, focusing on the ambiguous introduction of the infection, and sensitization of HCWs and community leaders. Conclusions: aPNS among established HIV patients is associated with different barriers and opportunities than aPNS among newly diagnosed patients, and HCWs should build their capacity to support aPNS in this population. There is a strong need for increased training and sensitization on the use of aPNS in different circumstances and for different clients, taking into consideration factors such as timing of partner notification, characteristics of the relationship and duration of knowledge discordance. The overall success of this intervention among populations living with HIV may rely on customization of services and key messages to meet the patients’ specific needs.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Health workers indicated that to deliver services effectively they would need support, including training, data management tools, funding, more staff time, and supportive policies.
“Health workers also indicated that to deliver services effectively they would need support, including training, data management tools, funding, more staff time allocated to complete certain tasks, and supportive policies (124, 127, 132-139).”
From Updated recommendations for the treatment of Neisseria gonorrhoeae, Chlamydia trachomatis, and Treponema pallidum (syphilis) and new recommendations on syphilis testing and partner services (2024) · cites this paper as [136]
The Conclusions (page unavailable) recommend training healthcare workers to provide assisted partner notification services and describe a training programme as a way to scale up the intervention. The paper does not substantiate the other listed needs—data management tools, funding, more staff time, or supportive policies—as needs indicated by health workers. (LLM, conf=0.86)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 23 · Cited by 42
Research works printed but not linked: 22
- 10.1136/bmjgh-2015-000010 · DOI
- 10.1371/journal.pone.0186316 · DOI
- 10.1097/QAD.0000000000001555 · DOI
- 10.1016/S2352-3018(16)30214-4 · DOI
- World Health Organization, 2016, Guidelines on HIV self‐testing and partner notification: supplement to consolidated guidelines on HIV testing services
- 10.1056/NEJM199201093260205 · DOI
- 10.1097/OLQ.0000000000000529 · DOI
- 10.1007/s10461-011-0094-9 · DOI
- 10.1007/s10461-017-1750-5 · DOI
- 10.1097/OLQ.0000000000000032 · DOI
- 10.1177/1049732315616624 · DOI
- 10.1093/eurpub/ckp231 · DOI
- 10.2105/AJPH.2006.096263 · DOI
- 10.1007/s10461-014-0729-8 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1365-3156.2007.01923.x · DOI
- 10.1186/1472-6963-13-198 · DOI
- 10.1089/apc.2016.0151 · DOI
- Charmaz K, 2014, Constructing grounded theory
- 10.1097/QAI.0000000000001638 · DOI
- 10.1007/s10461-017-1936-x · DOI · Paper page
- Kamanga G, 2015, Maximizing HIV partner notification opportunities for index patients and their sexual partners in Malawi, Malawi Med J, 27, 140, 10.4314/mmj.v27i4.5 · DOI
- 10.1186/s12913-018-2890-7 · DOI
Metadata
- Authors
- Monroe‐Wise, A., Maingi Mutiti, P., Kimani, H., Moraa, H., Bukusi, D. E., & Farquhar, C.
- Affiliations
- University of Washington (US)
- Kenyatta National Hospital Voluntary Counseling and Testing Centre Nairobi Kenya
- Kenyatta University (KE)
- Kenyatta National Hospital (KE)
- Corresponding author
- Monroe‐Wise, Aliza
- Venue
- Journal of the International AIDS Society
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2019-07
- Volume
- 22
- Issue
- S3
- Pages
- e25315-e25315
- ISSN
- 1758-2652 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC6639666
- OpenAlex
- W2963973101
- Cited by
- 42
- References
- 23
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 3
- FWCI
- 3.26
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Journal of the International AIDS Society (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institutes of Health (R01 A1099974)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › HIV/AIDS Research and Interventions
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › HIV, Drug Use, Sexual Risk
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
- Keywords
- HIV, HIV status disclosure, stigma and discrimination, HIV prevention, Nairobi
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Aged, Female, Health Personnel, Humans, Kenya, Male, Middle Aged, Sexual Partners, HIV Infections, Focus Groups, Disease Notification, Social Stigma
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review