Preference, acceptability and implications of the rapid hepatitis C screening test among high-risk young people who inject drugs

Abstract

BackgroundPeople who inject drugs (PWID) are at highest risk for hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection, yet many remain unaware of their infection status. New anti-HCV rapid testing has high potential to impact this.MethodsYoung adult (<30 years) active PWID were offered either the rapid OraQuick® or standard anti-HCV test involving phlebotomy, then asked to complete a short questionnaire about testing perceptions and preferences. Sample characteristics, service utilization, and injection risk exposures are assessed with the HCV testing choice as the outcome, testing preferences, and reasons for preference.ResultsOf 129 participants: 82.9% (n = 107) chose the rapid test. There were no significant differences between those who chose rapid vs. standard testing. A majority (60.2%) chose the rapid test for quick results; most (60.9%) felt the rapid test was accurate, and less painful (53.3%) than the tests involving venipuncture.ConclusionsOraQuick® anti-HCV rapid test was widely accepted among young PWID. Our results substantiate the valuable potential of anti-HCV rapid testing for HCV screening in this high risk population.

Community‐based, point‐of‐care hepatitis C testing: perspectives and preferences of people who inject drugs

“…Our study is the first to evaluate the acceptability of a point‐of‐care RNA test for hepatitis C in PWID who had been offered the opportunity to receive the result on the same day. As in previous studies of point‐of‐care antibody testing, participants in our study reported that 20 minutes was an acceptable amount of time to wait for a result . By contrast, none of our study's participants waited onsite to receive the result of their point‐of‐care RNA test.…”

“…As in previous studies of point-of-care antibody testing, participants in our study reported that 20 minutes was an acceptable amount of time to wait for a result. 6,7 By contrast, none of our study's participants waited onsite to receive the result of their point-of-care RNA test. This somewhat differs from the results of a recently published study of the hypothetical acceptability of rapid point-of-care RNA testing in PWID, which found that 16 per cent of participants reported being willing to wait for up to two hours to receive a result.…”

“…As reported in an earlier study of point-of-care testing in PWID, the invasiveness of venepuncture rarely had the greatest bearing on acceptability for our participants. 6 Overall, venepuncture was relatively more acceptable than other methods of specimen collection as it afforded two important advantages: the specimen could be tested for other blood-borne viruses (namely HIV) and, if needed, could also be used for pre-treatment workup tests (genotype, full blood examination, liver function tests). This finding is in contrast to that of a recent study, where despite most participants reporting that finger-stick and venepuncture testing were both "very acceptable," the majority (65 per cent) ultimately preferred finger-stick testing.…”

Increasing hepatitis C virus screening in people who inject drugs in Switzerland using rapid antibody saliva and dried blood spot testing: A cost‐effectiveness analysis

“…9,10 The acceptability of rapid antibody saliva and DBS tests to PWID has been demonstrated, 11 and PWID have expressed a preference for these tests because results can be obtained quickly whilst the experience is also less painful than venepuncture. 12 Therapeutic advances such as direct-acting antivirals (DAAs), which have shorter treatment durations and higher cure rates than interferon-based treatment regimens, offer the potential to improve the health outcomes of HCV-positive PWID through increased treatment uptake. 13,14 Furthermore, effective treatment of PWID can lead to a reduction in the transmission of HCV to other drug users and the general population.…”

“…Compared to venepuncture, screening via rapid antibody saliva and dried blood spot tests (DBS), which only requires capillary blood, is well adapted to PWID, for whom venous access is typically difficult . The acceptability of rapid antibody saliva and DBS tests to PWID has been demonstrated, and PWID have expressed a preference for these tests because results can be obtained quickly whilst the experience is also less painful than venepuncture …”