No abstract

Almost one in six households in this region of Haiti included a person with a disability, and the earthquake was the second leading cause of disability. Fewer than half of people who reported needing medical rehabilitation had received this service. The leading reported barriers to the uptake of health services included financial constraints (50%) and difficulties with transport (40%). People with disabilities did not participate equally in education or employment and had poorer access to health care.

IntroductionIn resource-limited countries, people with disabilities seem to be particularly vulnerable to HIV infection due to barriers to accessing information and services, frequent exposure to sexual violence and social exclusion. However, they have often been left behind in the HIV response, probably because of the lack of reliable epidemiological data measuring this vulnerability. Multiple challenges in conducting good quality epidemiological surveys on people with disabilities require innovative methods to better understand the link between disability and HIV. This paper describes how the design and methods of the HandiVIH study were adapted to document the vulnerability of people with disabilities to HIV, and to compare their situation with that of people without disabilities.Methods and analysisThe HandiVIH project aims to combine quantitative and qualitative data. The quantitative component is a cross-sectional survey with a control group conducted in Yaoundé (Cameroon). A two-phase random sampling is used (1) to screen people with disabilities from the general population using the Washington Group questionnaire and, (2) to create a matched control group. An HIV test is proposed to each study participant. Additionally, a questionnaire including a life-event interview is used to collect data on respondents’ life-course history of social isolation, employment, sexual partnership, HIV risk factors and fertility. Before the cross-sectional survey, a qualitative exploratory study was implemented to identify challenges in conducting the survey and possible solutions. Information on people with disabilities begging in the streets and members of disabled people's organisations is collected separately.Ethics and disseminationThis study has been approved by the two ethical committees. Special attention has been paid on how to adapt the consenting process to persons with intellectual disabilities. The methodological considerations discussed in this paper may contribute to the development of good practices for conducting quantitative health surveys on people with disabilities.Trial registration numberNCT02192658.

The desire to ensure that the benefits of successful small‐scale social innovation are more widely available has led to a plethora of frameworks that seek to scale such innovations. We review 20 extant frameworks for scaling and distinguished four directions: up (producing changes in laws, policies, institutions or norms), down (resource allocation to support implementation), in (ensuring organizations have the capacity to deliver the type and number of good practices required) and out (geographically replicating or broadening the range or scope of good practices). In addition to these directions of scaling a generic pathway, or process, to achieve scaling is also discernible across many of the frameworks reviewed. This involves five phases: identifying, planning, implementing, learning and adapting. We stress the need for a more dynamic and systemic approach to scaling, as well as one which anticipates, addresses and assesses the extent to which scaling is inclusive of marginalized groups.

A standardized set of measures to assess functioning after trauma in humanitarian settings has been called for. The Activity Independence Measure for Trauma (AIM-T) is a clinician-rated measure of independence in 20 daily activities among patients after trauma. Designed in Afghanistan, it has since been used in other contexts. Before recommending the AIM-T for wider use, its measurement properties required confirmation. This study aims at item reduction followed by content validity assessment of the AIM-T. Using a two-step revision process, first, routinely collected data from 635 patients at five facilities managing patients after trauma in Haiti, Burundi, Yemen, and Iraq were used for item reduction. This was performed by analyzing inter-item redundancy and distribution of the first version of the AIM-T (AIM-T1) item scores, resulting in a shortened version (AIM-T2). Second, content validity of the AIM-T2 was assessed by item content validity indices (I-CVI, 0–1) based on structured interviews with 23 health care professionals and 60 patients in Haiti, Burundi, and Iraq. Through the analyses, nine pairs of redundant items (r≥0.90) were identified in the AIM-T1, leading to the removal of nine items, and resulting in AIM-T2. All remaining items were judged highly relevant, appropriate, clear, feasible and representative by most of participants (I-CVI>0.5). Ten items with I-CVI 0.5–0.85 were revised to improve their cultural relevance or appropriateness and one item was added, resulting in the AIM-T3. In conclusion, the proposed 12-item AIM-T3 is overall relevant, clear, and representative of independence in daily activity after trauma and it includes items appropriate and feasible to be observed by clinicians across different humanitarian settings. While some additional measurement properties remain to be evaluated, the present version already has the potential to serve as a routine measure to assess patients after trauma in humanitarian settings.