Arguments for and against HIV self-testing

Brian R Wood,1 Carl Ballenger,1 Joanne D Stekler1,21Division of Allergy and Infectious Disease, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA; 2Public Health, Seattle and King County HIV/STD Program, Seattle, WA, USA Abstract: Approximately 60% of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected individua...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Wood BR, Ballenger C, Stekler JD
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	Dove Medical Press 2014
Materias:	Immunologic diseases. Allergy RC581-607
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/c21854e1032f490f88321a200e0f83a4
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:c21854e1032f490f88321a200e0f83a4
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:c21854e1032f490f88321a200e0f83a42021-12-02T05:03:19ZArguments for and against HIV self-testing1179-1373https://doaj.org/article/c21854e1032f490f88321a200e0f83a42014-08-01T00:00:00Zhttp://www.dovepress.com/arguments-for-and-against-hiv-self-testing-peer-reviewed-article-HIVhttps://doaj.org/toc/1179-1373 Brian R Wood,1 Carl Ballenger,1 Joanne D Stekler1,21Division of Allergy and Infectious Disease, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA; 2Public Health, Seattle and King County HIV/STD Program, Seattle, WA, USA Abstract: Approximately 60% of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected individuals are unaware of their infection, and stigma and discrimination continue to threaten acceptance of HIV testing services worldwide. Self-testing for HIV has garnered controversy for years and the debate reignited with the approval of a point-of-care test for over-the-counter sale in the US in 2012. Here, we present arguments for and against HIV self-testing. The case in support of HIV self-testing contends that: the modality is highly acceptable, especially among the most at-risk individuals; self-testing empowers users, thus helping to normalize testing; and mutual partner testing has the potential to increase awareness of risk and avert condomless sex between discordant partners. Arguments against HIV self-testing include: cost limits access to those who need testing most; false-negative results, especially during the window period, may lead to false reassurance and could promote sex between discordant partners at the time of highest infectivity; opportunities for counseling, linkage to care, and diagnosis of other sexually transmitted infections may be missed; and self-testing leads to potential for coercion between partners. Research is needed to better define the risks of self-testing, especially as performance of the assays improves, and to delineate the benefits of programs designed to improve access to self-test kits, because this testing modality has numerous potential advantages and drawbacks. Keywords: HIV, AIDS, self-testing, diagnosis, screeningWood BRBallenger CStekler JDDove Medical PressarticleImmunologic diseases. AllergyRC581-607ENHIV/AIDS: Research and Palliative Care, Vol 2014, Iss default, Pp 117-126 (2014)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	Immunologic diseases. Allergy RC581-607
spellingShingle	Immunologic diseases. Allergy RC581-607 Wood BR Ballenger C Stekler JD Arguments for and against HIV self-testing
description	Brian R Wood,1 Carl Ballenger,1 Joanne D Stekler1,21Division of Allergy and Infectious Disease, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA; 2Public Health, Seattle and King County HIV/STD Program, Seattle, WA, USA Abstract: Approximately 60% of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected individuals are unaware of their infection, and stigma and discrimination continue to threaten acceptance of HIV testing services worldwide. Self-testing for HIV has garnered controversy for years and the debate reignited with the approval of a point-of-care test for over-the-counter sale in the US in 2012. Here, we present arguments for and against HIV self-testing. The case in support of HIV self-testing contends that: the modality is highly acceptable, especially among the most at-risk individuals; self-testing empowers users, thus helping to normalize testing; and mutual partner testing has the potential to increase awareness of risk and avert condomless sex between discordant partners. Arguments against HIV self-testing include: cost limits access to those who need testing most; false-negative results, especially during the window period, may lead to false reassurance and could promote sex between discordant partners at the time of highest infectivity; opportunities for counseling, linkage to care, and diagnosis of other sexually transmitted infections may be missed; and self-testing leads to potential for coercion between partners. Research is needed to better define the risks of self-testing, especially as performance of the assays improves, and to delineate the benefits of programs designed to improve access to self-test kits, because this testing modality has numerous potential advantages and drawbacks. Keywords: HIV, AIDS, self-testing, diagnosis, screening
format	article
author	Wood BR Ballenger C Stekler JD
author_facet	Wood BR Ballenger C Stekler JD
author_sort	Wood BR
title	Arguments for and against HIV self-testing
title_short	Arguments for and against HIV self-testing
title_full	Arguments for and against HIV self-testing
title_fullStr	Arguments for and against HIV self-testing
title_full_unstemmed	Arguments for and against HIV self-testing
title_sort	arguments for and against hiv self-testing
publisher	Dove Medical Press
publishDate	2014
url	https://doaj.org/article/c21854e1032f490f88321a200e0f83a4
work_keys_str_mv	AT woodbr argumentsforandagainsthivselftesting AT ballengerc argumentsforandagainsthivselftesting AT steklerjd argumentsforandagainsthivselftesting
_version_	1718400735766380544

Arguments for and against HIV self-testing

Ejemplares similares