HIV self-testing in the real world is acceptable for many: post-test participant feedback from the GetaKit study in Ottawa, Canada

Abstract

Background: HIV self-testing is the latest strategy to improve access to testing, diagnosis and treatment. Such strategies are beneficial due to the improved individual- and population-level health outcomes that emerge from early HIV diagnosis. Aims: While most research shows that HIV self-testing is acceptable and feasible, yielding higher numbers of first-time testers and positivity rates, compared to clinic-based testing, little evidence exists outside low- and middle-income countries about such testing. Methods: We implemented GetaKit.ca, a website through which eligible participants could register for and obtain an INSTI® HIV self-testing to their home, and then report the result back. Results: Those who returned to the website were asked to complete a post-test survey, which had a low response rate (42%), but identified satisfaction scores of 92%. Notably, 5% of testers sought in-person care after ordering the self-test, and only 80% of participants agreed that the INSTI® HIV self-test was easy to use. Conclusions: Participants provided tangible solutions to improve this test, which we feel are easy to incorporate and essential to maintain HIV self-testing efforts.

Rapid HIV Self-Testing

“…We found 1 pre-Health Canada authorization study 7 and 1 post-Health Canada authorization study 23 of the INSTI HIV Self-Test in Canada� The postauthorization study was reported across 6 publications� 20, [23][24][25][26][27] Pre-Canadian Authorization…”

“…The GetaKit program (initiated in 2020 and active as of publication) is reported to be the first Canadian no cost HIV self-testing program in Canada� 18 GetaKit provides INSTI HIV-1/2 Antibody Self Test kits at no cost to residents across Canada� 18 We found 1 prospective real-world observational study of the GetaKit HIV selftesting program (results presented across 6 publications). 20, [23][24][25][26][27] As described by the authors, the evaluation of GetaKit has 4 phases:…”

“…Using post-test survey data, O'Byrne et al (2022b) 25 reported on "participants' experiences of, and feedback about, participating in HIV self-testing" during the pilot phase of the GetaKit program to understand the acceptability of HIV self-testing. In 167 (42%) completed post-test surveys received from the 228 (57%) participants who returned a test result, the authors found that:…”

“…While tests are designed and intended to be done alone, additional supports are likely needed to ensure accurate HIV self-test use� 25 Additional supports could take many forms, including: real-time assistance by video, phone, or in-person appointments, additional information resources in a variety of format types (e�g�, written or video) to help testers use the tests so they work the first time, or in-person self-testing spaces where testers could get help performing the test� 7,25 Data from Galli et al 7 supports the need for alternate testing locations� When asked about testing location preferences, 60% of testers said they would prefer to do the test at home and 40% said they would prefer to use the self-test in a clinic or other health care facility -suggested assisted and unassisted self-testing options are needed for real-world access and uptake�…”