Published online Jun 20, 2023. doi: 10.5662/wjm.v13.i3.142
Peer-review started: January 18, 2023
First decision: April 20, 2023
Revised: April 22, 2023
Accepted: May 24, 2023
Article in press: May 24, 2023
Published online: June 20, 2023
Processing time: 153 Days and 1.8 Hours
Human immunodeficiency virus self-testing (HIVST) has been shown to increase testing rates and improve early HIV diagnosis. However, there are different testing modalities, including oral- and blood-based HIVST, and little is known about the preferences for these different types of HIVST.
Identifying preferences for oral- vs blood-based HIVST is crucial for the development and implementation of effective HIVST programs. Understanding the factors that influence these preferences can also inform strategies for increasing uptake of HIVST.
The main objective of this scoping review was to provide a comprehensive overview of the literature on preferences for oral- vs blood-based HIVST. Specific objectives included identifying factors that influence preferences, exploring the implications of these preferences for the promotion and implementation of HIVST programs, and highlighting gaps in the literature.
A scoping review methodology was used to identify and synthesize relevant literature on preferences for oral- vs blood-based HIVST. The review included studies published in English between 2011 and 2021 that focused on actual and not hypothetical users of HIVST.
The search yielded 2424 records, of which 8 studies were included in the review. Across all studies, pooled preference for oral HIVST was 59.8%, whereas for blood-based HIVST, it was 48.8%. However, in studies specific to men, the preference for blood-based HIVST (58%-65.6%) was higher than oral (34.2%-41%). Men favored blood-based HIVST because of its perceived accuracy and rapidity, whereas oral HIVST was preferred for being non-invasive and easy to use.
Preferences for oral- vs blood-based HIVST are influenced by various factors, including user characteristics such as sex, testing context, and perceived test accuracy. Programs promoting HIVST should consider these factors when designing and implementing HIVST programs. Further research is needed to explore the impact of these preferences on HIV testing rates and to identify effective strategies for increasing the uptake of HIVST.
Future research should focus on identifying effective strategies for increasing the uptake of HIVST, particularly among populations that may have unique preferences or barriers to testing. Longitudinal studies could also help to explore the impact of these preferences on HIV testing rates and linkage to care. Additionally, studies should continue to explore the accuracy and feasibility of new HIVST technologies.