Primary healthcare facilities are central to the implementation of voluntary medical male circumcision (VMMC) as points of access to integrated health services in line with the Kenya AIDS Strategic Framework II (2020/21-2024/25). Knowledge of factors that explain men's uptake of VMMC and sexual health services at these facilities and preferences of where to get the services remain poorly understood. Using qualitative methodologies, we examined factors that determined facility choice for VMMC services and reasons for preferring the facility among men aged 25-39 years who previously underwent VMMC. The current study draws from focus group discussion interviews with circumcised men and their partners conducted as part of a randomized controlled trial to assess impact of two demand creation interventions in western Kenya. This involved 12 focus group discussions (FGD) with 6-10 participants each. Six FGDs were conducted with circumcised men, and 6 with their sex partners. Thematic issues relevant to a predetermined framework were identified. The themes were organized as follows: service availability, accessibility, affordability, appropriateness and, acceptability. Facility location, physical layout, organization of patient flow, infrastructure, and service provider skills were the outstanding factors affecting the choice of VMMC service outlets by men aged 25-39 years. Additionally, preferences were influenced by individual's disposition, attitudes, knowledge of VMMC services and tacit balance between their own recognized health needs versus desire to conform to social-cultural norms. Facility choice and individual preference are intricate issues, simultaneously involving multiple but largely intra-personal and facility-level factors. The intrapersonal dimensions elicited may also reflect differential responses to strategic communications and demand creation messages with promotion and prevention frames.

INTRODUCTION: the increasing number of people receiving antiretroviral therapy (ART) in sub-Saharan Africa has stressed already overburdened health systems. A care model utilizing community-based peer-groups (ART Co-ops) facilitated by community health workers (CHW) was implemented (2016-2018) to address these challenges. In 2018, a post-intervention study assessed perceptions of the intervention. METHODS: forty participants were engaged in focus group discussions consisting of ART Co-op clients, study staff, and health care providers from Kitale HIV clinic. Data were analyzed thematically for content on the intervention, challenges, and recommendations for improvement. RESULTS: all participants liked the intervention. However, some reported traveling long distances to attend ART Co-op meetings and experiencing stigma with ART Co-ops participation. The ART Co-op inclusion criteria were considered appropriate; however, additional outreach to deliberately include spouses living with HIV, the disabled, the poor, and HIV pregnant women was recommended. Participants liked CHW-directed quarterly group meetings which included ART distribution, adherence review, and illness identification. The inability of the CHW to provide full clinical care, inconvenient meeting venues, poor timekeeping, and non-attendance behaviors were noted as issues. Participants indicated that program continuation, regular CHW training, rotating meetings at group members´ homes, training ART Co-ops leaders to assume CHW tasks, use of pill diaries to check adherence, nutritional support, and economically empowering members through income generation projects would be beneficial. CONCLUSION: the intervention was viewed positively by both clinic staff and clients. They identified specific challenges and generated actionable key considerations to improve access and acceptability of the community-based model of care.

In Kenya, HIV prevalence estimates among female sex workers (FSWs) are almost five times higher than among women in the general population. However, only 68% of infected FSWs are aware of their HIV-positive status. We aimed to identify perceived benefits, opportunities, and barriers of HIV self-testing (HIVST) in improving testing coverage among FSWs. Twenty focus group discussions were conducted with 77 service providers, 42 peer educators (PEs) and outreach workers, and 37 FSWs attending drop-in centers (DiCEs) in four regions of Kenya. An additional 8 FSWs with HIV-negative or unknown status-completed in-depth interviews. Data were analyzed thematically. Acceptability of HIVST was high, with cited benefits including confidentiality, convenience, and ease of use. Barriers included absence of counseling, potential for inaccurate results, fear of partner reaction, possible misuse, and fear that HIVST could lead to further stigmatization. PEs and DiCEs were the preferred models for distributing HIVST kits. FSWs wanted kits made available free or at a nominal cost (100 Kenya Shillings or ∼USD 1). Linkage to confirmatory testing, the efficiency of distributing HIVST kits using peers and DiCEs, and the types and content of effective HIVST messaging require further research.

OBJECTIVE: To develop and assess an alternative care model using community-based care groups for PLHIV and facilitated by trained lay personnel. METHODS: Geographic locations in the Academic Model Providing Access to Healthcare Kitale clinic catchment were randomized to standard of care versus a community-based care group (ART Co-op). Adults stable on ART and virally suppressed were eligible. Research Assistant led ART Co-ops met in the community every three months. Participants were seen in the HIV clinic only if referred by study staff or by self-referral. CD4 count and viral load were measured in clinic at enrollment and after 12 months. . Retention, viral suppression, and clinic utilization were compared between groups using Chi square, Fishers exact and Wilcoxon rank sum test. RESULTS: At 12 months there were no significant differences in mean CD4 count or viral load suppression. There was a significant difference in patient retention in assigned study group between the intervention and control group (81.6% versus 98.6%; p<0.001), with a number of intervention patients withdrawing due to stigma, relocation, pregnancy, and work conflicts. All study participants, however, were retained in a HIV care program for the study duration. The median number of clinic visits was lower for the intervention group than the control group (0 vs 3; p<0.001). CONCLUSION: Individuals retained in a community-based HIV care model had clinical outcomes equivalent to those receiving clinic-based care. This innovative model of HIV care addresses the problems of insufficient healthcare personnel and patient retention barriers including time, distance, and cost to attend clinic, and has the potential for wider implementation.

BACKGROUND: Substantial efforts have been made to ensure people living with HIV (PLHIV) are linked to and retained in care but many challenges deter care utilization. We report perceived benefits of seeking HIV care and barriers to HIV care that were identified through a formative assessment conducted to advise the development of an alternative care model to deliver antiretroviral treatment therapy (ART) in Trans Nzoia County, Kenya. METHODS: Data were collected in 2015 through key informant interviews (KIIs), in-depth interviews (IDIs), and focus group discussions (FGDs). The study involved 55 participants of whom 53% were female. Ten KIIs provided community contextual information and viewpoints on the HIV epidemic in Trans Nzoia County while 20 PLHIV (10 male and 10 female) participated in IDIs. Twenty-five individuals living with HIV participated in four FGDs - two groups for men and two for women. Key informants were purposively selected, while every third patient above 18 years at the Kitale HIV Clinic was invited to share their HIV care experience through IDIs or FGDs. Trained research assistants moderated all sessions and audio recordings were transcribed and analyzed thematically. RESULTS: Findings showed that PLHIV in Trans Nzoia County used both conventional and complementary alternative care for HIV; however, public health facilities were preferred. Popular perceived benefits of adopting care were relief from symptoms and the chance to live longer. Benefits of care uptake included weight gain, renewed energy, and positive behavior change. Individual-level barriers to HIV care included lack of money and food, use of alternative care, negative side effects of ART, denial, and disclosure difficulties. At the community level, stigma, limited social support for conventional HIV treatment, and poor means of transport were reported. The health system barriers were limited supplies and staff, long distance to conventional HIV care, and unprofessional providers. CONCLUSIONS: Diverse individual, community and health system barriers continue to affect HIV care-seeking efforts in Kenya. Appreciation of context and lived experiences allows for development of realistic care models.