Feasibility of a Population Based Survey on HIV Prevalence in Barbados, and Population Preference for Sample Identification Method

Adams, O Peter; Carter, Anne O.

doi:10.2174/1874613601004010084

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Voluntary counselling and confidential HIV testing using a code rather than name to identify specimens sent to the laboratory is available free through publicly funded polyclinics, and for a fee through private practitioners. Anonymous testing is not done [ 25 ]. Point-of-care HIV testing is not usually done, and collected blood is tested at a single public laboratory.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding attitudes, barriers and challenges in a small island nation to disease and partner notification for HIV and other sexually transmitted infections: a qualitative study

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundIn Barbados sexually transmitted infections (STIs) including HIV are not notifiable diseases and there is not a formal partner notification (PN) programme. Objectives were to understand likely attitudes, barriers, and challenges to introducing mandatory disease notification (DN) and partner notification (PN) for HIV and other STIs in a small island state.MethodsSix key informants identified study participants. Interviews were conducted, recorded, transcribed and analysed for content using standard methods.ResultsParticipants (16 males, 13 females, median age 59 years) included physicians, nurses, and representatives from governmental, youth, HIV, men’s, women’s, church, and private sector organisations.The median estimated acceptability by society of HIV/STI DN on a scale of 1 (unacceptable) to 5 (completely acceptable) was 3. Challenges included; maintaining confidentiality in a small island; public perception that confidentiality was poorly maintained; fear and stigma; testing might be deterred; reporting may not occur; enacting legislation would be difficult; and opposition by some opinion leaders.For PN, contract referral was the most acceptable method and provider referral the least. Contract referral unlike provider referral was not “a total suspension of rights” while taking into account that “people need a little gentle pressure sometimes”. Extra counselling would be needed to elicit contacts or to get patients to notify partners. Shame, stigma and discrimination in a small society may make PN unacceptable and deter testing. With patient referral procrastination may occur, and partners may react violently and not come in for care. With provider referral patients may have concerns about confidentiality including neighbours becoming suspicious if a home visit is used as the contact method. Successful contact tracing required time and effort. With contract referral people may neither inform contacts nor say that they did not.Strategies to overcome barriers to DN and PN included public education, enacting appropriate legislation to allow DN and PN, good patient counselling and maintaining confidentiality.ConclusionsThere was both concern that mandatory DN and PN would deter testing and recognition of the benefits. Public and practitioner education and enabling legislation would be necessary, and the public needed to be convinced that confidentiality would be maintained.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12889-015-1794-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%