Jessika Deblonde

Barriers to HIV testing in Europe: a systematic review

BACKGROUND In the European Union (EU) and neighbouring countries, HIV/AIDS, of all infectious diseases, has one of the highest morbidity and mortality rates. An estimated 30% of people living with HIV are unaware of their infection, and may therefore not benefit from timely treatment or may transmit HIV to others, unknowingly. Evidence shows that opportunities are being missed to diagnose HIV infections in EU Member States, particularly in regular health care settings. There is a need to better understand the barriers to HIV testing and counselling with the aim to contribute to the decrease of the number of undiagnosed people. METHODS A systematic review of literature on HIV testing barriers in Europe was conducted, applying a free text strategy with a set of search terms. RESULTS A total of 24 studies published in international peer-reviewed journals and meeting the reviews eligibility criteria were identified. Fourteen studies report on barriers at the level of the patient; six on barriers at health care provider level and seven on institutional barriers referring to the policy level. The barriers described are centralized around low-risk perception; fear and worries; accessibility of health services, reluctance to address HIV and to offer the test; and scarcity of financial and well trained human resources. CONCLUSIONS Some barriers to HIV testing and counselling have been illustrated in the literature. Nevertheless, there is lack of structured information on barriers considering (i) legal, administrative and financial factors, (ii) attitudes and practices of health care providers and (iii) perception of patients. Such data is critical to improve effectiveness of HIV testing and counselling.

Female genital mutilation : Knowledge, attitudes and practices of Flemish gynaecologists

Objective To assess the knowledge, attitudes and practices with regard to female genital mutilation (FGM) among gynaecologists in Flanders, Belgium. Methods A questionnaire-based survey was sent to 724 Flemish gynaecologists and trainees. Results Three-hundred-and-thirty-four questionnaires were returned. The survey revealed gaps in the knowledge of FGM and the provision of care by Flemish gynaecologists to women who had been mutilated. It also appeared that FGM was not properly addressed in the basic and specialized medical training in Flanders, that little was known about codes of conduct issued by the hospitals when these were not lacking altogether, and that knowledge about legislation concerning FGM was deficient. There was much confusion whether re-infibulation is authorized, and what its legal status is. Some respondents considered cosmetic vaginal surgery as a form of FGM and many were in favour of the medicalization of FGM. Gynaecologists were most commonly confronted with complaints related to sexual problems caused by FGM. Finally, the study also showed that only about a third of the gynaecologists were discouraging women from having their daughters excised. Conclusion There is a need for a thorough discussion among all those concerned of the ethical and legal aspects of re-infibulation, medicalization of FGM and cosmetic vaginal surgery.

HIV testing in Europe: Mapping policies

OBJECTIVES In the absence of treatment and in the context of discrimination, HIV testing was embedded within exceptional procedures. With increasing treatment effectiveness, early HIV diagnosis became important, calling for the normalization of testing. National HIV testing policies were mapped to explore the characteristics and variations across European countries. METHODS Key informants within the health authorities of all EU/EEA countries were questioned on HIV testing policies, which were assessed within a conceptual framework and the level of exceptionalism and normalization was scored based on defined attributes. RESULTS Twenty-four out of 31 countries participated in the survey. Policies tended to support confidential voluntary testing, informed consent, and counselling. In the majority of countries, specific groups were targeted for provider-initiated testing. Taking together all attributes of HIV testing, 14 countries obtained a high score for exceptionalism, while only 3 achieved a high score on normalization. Italy, Lithuania and Romania had primarily exceptional procedures; Norway leant more towards normalization; Netherlands, the United Kingdom, and Denmark scored high in both. CONCLUSIONS In most EU/EEA countries, policies are integrating HIV testing in health care settings, through voluntary and targeted testing strategies. Current HIV testing policies exhibited a high level of exceptionalism with varying degrees of normalization. Further research should compare HIV testing policies with practices.

HIV testing practices as reported by HIV-infected patients in four European countries

HIV testing constitutes an important strategy to control the HIV epidemic, which therefore merits an observation of HIV testing practices to help improve testing effectiveness. In 2008, a cross-sectional survey among recently diagnosed (≤ 3 years) HIV-infected patients was conducted in Belgium, Estonia, Finland and Portugal. Participants were questioned about reasons for HIV testing, testing place and testing conditions. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed. Out of 1460 eligible participants, 629 (43%) were included. Forty-one per cent were diagnosed late and 55% had never undergone a previous HIV test with perceived low risk being the primary reason for not having been tested earlier. Heterogeneity in HIV testing practices was observed across countries. Overall, tests were most frequently conducted in primary care (38%) and specialised clinics (21%), primarily on the initiative of the health care provider (65%). Sixty-one per cent were tested with informed consent, 31% received pretest counselling, 78% received post-test counselling, 71% were involved in partner notification and 92% were in care three months after diagnosis. The results showed that HIV testing is done in a variety of settings suggesting that multiple pathways to HIV testing are provided. HIV testing practice is being normalised, with less focus on pretest counselling, yet with emphasis on post-test follow-up. Major barriers to testing are centred on the denial of risk. Efforts are needed to concurrently promote public awareness about HIV risk and benefits of HIV testing and train clinicians to be more proactive in offering HIV testing.

Is HIV testing normal or special? Opinions of health professionals in four European countries in 2008

The special norms in testing for HIV infection are not typical of testing or screening for other diseases. In four European countries, we studied health professionals’ views on HIV testing This study is based on cross-sectional surveys of two groups of health professionals: presidents of selected health professional societies and head physicians and nurses of selected hospital clinics in Belgium, Estonia, Finland, and Portugal in 2008. A common structured semi-anonymous questionnaire was used in the four countries. The number of societies responding varied from five to 10 and for hospital clinics from six to 18; the response rates were from 32% to 100% and 41% to 100%, respectively. Opinions on whether HIV testing is like any other test and on the value of specific approaches in HIV testing varied both within and between countries. Some professionals thought that HIV testing is different from the testing of other infectious diseases; others thought that such an exceptional approach may be a disservice to people and to the health system. Many professionals thought that HIV testing should not be thought of only from the point of view of the individual to be tested, but also from that of other people (potential patients). Obligatory testing was considered appropriate in certain circumstances. Generally, more HIV testing in health care was called for. Normalization of HIV testing, i.e., considering it like any other diagnostic test, is unlikely to meet much opposition from health professionals. Larger surveys are needed to confirm the results.