Adeagbo, Oluwafemi, Seeley, Janet, Gumede, Dumsani, Xulu, Sibongiseni, Dlamini, Nondumiso, Luthuli, Manono, Dreyer, Jaco, Herbst, Carina, Cowan, Frances, Chimbindi, Natsayi, Hatzold, Karin, Okesola, Nonhlanhla, Johnson, Cheryl, Harling, Guy, Subedar, Hasina, Sherr, Lorraine, Mcgrath, Nuala, Corbett, Elizabeth L. and Shahmanesh, Maryam (2022) Process evaluation of peer-to-peer delivery of HIV self-testing and sexual health information to support HIV prevention among youth in rural KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa: qualitative analysis. BMJ Open, 12 (2), [e048780]. (doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2021-048780).
Abstract
Objective: Peer-to-peer (PTP) HIV self-testing (HIVST) distribution models can increase uptake of HIV testing and potentially create demand for HIV treatment and pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP). We describe the acceptability and experiences of young women and men participating in a cluster randomised trial of PTP HIVST distribution and antiretroviral/PrEP promotion in rural KwaZulu-Natal.
Methods: Between March and September 2019, 24 pairs of trained peer navigators were randomised to two approaches to distribute HIVST packs (kits+HIV prevention information): incentivised-peer-networks where peer-age friends distributed packs within their social network for a small incentive, or direct distribution where peer navigators distributed HIVST packs directly. Standard-of-care peer navigators distributed information without HIVST kits. For the process evaluation, we conducted semi-structured interviews with purposively sampled young women (n=30) and men (n=15) aged 18–29 years from all arms. Qualitative data were transcribed, translated, coded manually and thematically analysed using an interpretivist approach.
Results: Overall, PTP approaches were acceptable and valued by young people. Participants were comfortable sharing sexual health issues they would not share with adults. Coupled with HIVST, peer (friends) support facilitated HIV testing and solidarity for HIV status disclosure and treatment. However, some young people showed limited interest in other sexual health information provided. Some young people were wary of receiving health information from friends perceived as non-professionals while others avoided sharing personal issues with peer navigators from their community. Referral slips and youth-friendly clinics were facilitators to PrEP uptake. Family disapproval, limited information, daily pills and perceived risks were major barriers to PrEP uptake.
Conclusion: Both professional (peer navigators) and social network (friends) approaches were acceptable methods to receive HIVST and sexual health information. Doubts about the professionalism of friends and overly exclusive focus on HIVST information materials may in part explain why HIVST kits, without peer navigators support, did not create demand for PrEP.
More information
Identifiers
Catalogue record
Export record
Altmetrics
Contributors
Download statistics
Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.