This study assesses the effectiveness of HCV self-testing (HCVST) distribution models compared to provider-led HCV testing (PL-HCVT), including the standard of care facility-based HCVT (SOC-HCVT) and community-based organization HCVT (CBO-HCVT) among people who inject drugs (PWID) in Vietnam. A cross-sectional study was conducted as part of a larger implementation science study in Hanoi and Ho Chi Minh City from September 2023 to April 2024. We engaged 8 CBOs and 10 public and private clinics in offering choice of HCVST through community-based and facility-based distribution, and secondary distribution), or PL-HCVT via SOC-HCVT and CBO-HCVT. Among 1,165 PWID, 693 opted for HCVST and 472 for PL-HCVT. The proportion of first-time testers was significantly higher in HIVST community-based and secondary distribution as well as CBO-HCVT compared to SOC-HCVT and facility-based HCVST (87.1%, 93.3% and 82.7% vs. 41.9% and 35.7%, respectively; p < 0.001). Overall, HCV seropositivity rate was lower in HCVST than PL-HCVT, however, higher in HCVST facility-based and community-based distribution compared to HCVST secondary distribution (28.1% and 20.4% vs. 5.7%, respectively). Community-based HCVST was most effective, followed by facility-based HCVST and secondary distribution. Our findings indicate that HCVST effectively reaches first-time testers and results in more people diagnosed and treated among PWID.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Vu et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: