Routine or targeted HIV screening of Indonesian prisoners

Nelwan, Erni Juwita; Ahmad, Ishtiaq; Alisjahbana, Bachti; Triani, Nurlita; Djamaris, Iqbal; Djaja, Ilham; Pohan, Herdiman T.; Zwanikken, Prisca; Crevel, Reinout van; Ven, André van der; Meheus, A

doi:10.1108/ijph-04-2015-0012

Cited by 11 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Seven studies reported opt-out testing conducted during this process [8, 37, 38, 45, 46, 48]. Seven other articles reported testing taking place anywhere between 3 and 14 days after first reception, often during a secondary health check [39, 40, 44, 49–52]. Testing at a secondary clinic often occurred because of a perceived lack of time during the first night or because the first night health check was reserved for dealing with urgent healthcare problems that required immediate intervention [39, 40, 44, 49–52].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Seven other articles reported testing taking place anywhere between 3 and 14 days after first reception, often during a secondary health check [39, 40, 44, 49–52]. Testing at a secondary clinic often occurred because of a perceived lack of time during the first night or because the first night health check was reserved for dealing with urgent healthcare problems that required immediate intervention [39, 40, 44, 49–52]. In a prison that has a rapid population turn-over (C), a programme mandated delay in engaging intake with an opt-out test offer (MR) reduces the proportion of intake offered a test (O), as some individuals have already been released or transferred (C).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A fear of needles was frequently highlighted as a justification for opt-out [12, 13, 40–42, 57, 64–66]. A proportion of prisoner’s fear needles (C).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Educational information on BBVs was an important resource for opt-out programmes [13, 40, 47, 48, 57, 60, 63, 68]. Misconceptions around BBVs are common amongst prisoners (C).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Understanding how, why, for whom, and under what circumstances opt-out blood-borne virus testing programmes work to increase test engagement and uptake within prison: a rapid-realist review

Francis-Graham

Ekeke

Nelson

et al. 2019

BMC Health Serv Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Prisons represent a unique opportunity to diagnose blood-borne viruses. Opt-out testing is receiving increasing interest, as a result of mounting evidence to suggest that the manner in which a test offer is delivered, affects test uptake. Although the effectiveness of opt-out testing within the prison setting has been established, robust explanations are required for the variation in outcomes reported. Methods Rapid-realist review methodology was used to synthesise the literature on prison-based opt-out testing. The review was carried out in three phases. Phase one: An expert panel provided literature relevant to the implementation of opt-out testing within the English prison estate. Unstructured searches were also conducted to identify other social programmes where “opt-out” had been used to increase uptake. Phase two: a systematic search of six peer-review and five grey literature databases was carried out to identify empirical data on opt-out testing within the prison setting. Phase three: Additional non-exhaustive searches were carried out to identify literature that reinforced emergent concepts. The development of programme theory took place with each iteration and was validated in consultation with stakeholders. Results Programme theory was constructed for two outcomes: the proportion of intake offered a test and the proportion offered that accepted testing. The proportion of intake offered testing was influenced by the timing of the test offer, which was often delayed due to barriers to prisoner access. The decision to accept testing was influenced by concerns about confidentiality, fear of a positive diagnosis, a prisoner’s personal interpretation of risk, discomfort with invasive procedures, trust in healthcare, and the fidelity of the opt-out offer. Conclusions This review identified important implementation considerations that moderate the effectiveness of opt-out testing programmes. It also highlighted a lack of appreciation for the theoretical underpinnings of opt-out programmes and tension around how to implement testing in a manner that adheres to both default theory and informed consent. It is anticipated that results will be used to inform the design and implementation of subsequent versions of these programmes, as well as catalyse further in-depth analysis into their operation within the unique context of prison. Review registration CRD42017068342 . Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s12913-019-3970-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A fear of needles was frequently highlighted as a justification for opt-out [12, 13, 40–42, 57, 64–66]. A proportion of prisoner’s fear needles (C).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Educational information on BBVs was an important resource for opt-out programmes [13, 40, 47, 48, 57, 60, 63, 68]. Misconceptions around BBVs are common amongst prisoners (C).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Understanding how, why, for whom, and under what circumstances opt-out blood-borne virus testing programmes work to increase test engagement and uptake within prison: a rapid-realist review

Francis-Graham

Ekeke

Nelson

et al. 2019

BMC Health Serv Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Both facilities are extremely overcrowded and HIV prevalence rates are higher compared to prisons in other parts of the country [57]. HIV testing is offered to all persons during intake into jails and also at the request of inmates [58]. Persons diagnosed with HIV may access ART at no cost through prison-based HIV subspecialty clinics located within each prison.…”

Section: Study Settingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring the acceptability of HIV partner notification in prisons: Findings from a survey of incarcerated people living with HIV in Indonesia

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Assisted HIV partner notification services provide a safe and effective way for people living with HIV (PLHIV) to inform their partners about the possibility of exposure and to offer them testing, treatment, and support. This study examined whether or not PLHIV in prison might be willing to participate in assisted HIV partner notification services and their reasons for and against disclosing their HIV-positive status to their partners. PLHIV (n = 150) recruited from Jakarta's two largest all-male prisons completed an interviewer-administered questionnaire collecting demographic and risk behavior data, and attitudes toward HIV disclosure and partner services. Among those who were sexually active and/or injecting drugs before incarceration, two-thirds (66.4%, 91/137) endorsed provider referral as an acceptable way to notify their sex partners, and nearly three quarters (72.4%, 89/123) endorsed provider referral to notify their drug-injecting partners. Only a quarter (25.1%) of participants reported that their main sex partner had ever received an HIV test. Participants with anticipated stigma were less likely to endorse provider referral for sex partners (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 0.58, 95% CI: 0.35, 0.96) and drug-injecting partners (aOR = 0.54, 95% CI: 0.29, 1.00). Relationship closeness was associated with higher odds of endorsing provider referral for drug-injecting partners (aOR = 2.08, 95% CI: 1.25, 3.45). Protecting partners from infection and a moral duty to inform were main reasons to disclose, while stigma and privacy concerns were main reasons not to disclose. Most incarcerated PLHIV have at-risk partners in the community who they would be willing to notify if provided with assistance. Assisted partner notification for prison populations offers a promising public health approach to accelerate diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of HIV infection in the community, particularly among women.

show abstract

Adherence to Antiretroviral Therapy Among Incarcerated Persons with HIV: Associations with Methadone and Perceived Safety

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Routine or targeted HIV screening of Indonesian prisoners

Cited by 11 publications

References 26 publications

Understanding how, why, for whom, and under what circumstances opt-out blood-borne virus testing programmes work to increase test engagement and uptake within prison: a rapid-realist review

Understanding how, why, for whom, and under what circumstances opt-out blood-borne virus testing programmes work to increase test engagement and uptake within prison: a rapid-realist review

Exploring the acceptability of HIV partner notification in prisons: Findings from a survey of incarcerated people living with HIV in Indonesia

Adherence to Antiretroviral Therapy Among Incarcerated Persons with HIV: Associations with Methadone and Perceived Safety

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About