Accuracy and user-acceptability of HIV self-testing using an oral fluid-based HIV rapid test

PLoS One. 2012;7(9):e45168. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0045168. Epub 2012 Sep 17.

Abstract

Background: The United States FDA approved an over-the-counter HIV self-test, to facilitate increased HIV testing and earlier linkage to care. We assessed the accuracy of self-testing by untrained participants compared to healthcare worker (HCW) testing, participants' ability to interpret sample results and user-acceptability of self-tests in Singapore.

Methodology/principal findings: A cross-sectional study, involving 200 known HIV-positive patients and 794 unknown HIV status at-risk participants was conducted. Participants (all without prior self-test experience) performed self-testing guided solely by visual instructions, followed by HCW testing, both using the OraQuick ADVANCE Rapid HIV 1/2 Antibody Test, with both results interpreted by the HCW. To assess ability to interpret results, participants were provided 3 sample results (positive, negative, and invalid) to interpret. Of 192 participants who tested positive on HCW testing, self-testing was positive in 186 (96.9%), negative in 5 (2.6%), and invalid in 1 (0.5%). Of 794 participants who tested negative on HCW testing, self-testing was negative in 791 (99.6%), positive in 1 (0.1%), and invalid in 2 (0.3%). Excluding invalid tests, self-testing had sensitivity of 97.4% (95% CI 95.1% to 99.7%) and specificity of 99.9% (95% CI: 99.6% to 100%). When interpreting results, 96%, 93.1% and 95.2% correctly read the positive, negative and invalid respectively. There were no significant demographic predictors for false negative self-testing or wrongly interpreting positive or invalid sample results as negative. Eighty-seven percent would purchase the kit over-the-counter; 89% preferred to take HIV tests in private. 72.5% and 74.9% felt the need for pre- and post-test counseling respectively. Only 28% would pay at least USD15 for the test.

Conclusions/significance: Self-testing was associated with high specificity, and a small but significant number of false negatives. Incorrectly identifying model results as invalid was a major reason for incorrect result interpretation. Survey responses were supportive of making self-testing available.

Publication types

  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • AIDS Serodiagnosis / methods*
  • AIDS Serodiagnosis / statistics & numerical data
  • Adult
  • Cross-Sectional Studies
  • Diagnostic Self Evaluation*
  • False Negative Reactions
  • Female
  • HIV / chemistry*
  • HIV Antibodies / blood*
  • HIV Antibodies / immunology
  • HIV Seropositivity / blood
  • HIV Seropositivity / diagnosis*
  • HIV Seropositivity / immunology
  • Humans
  • Male
  • Mass Screening
  • Middle Aged
  • Reagent Kits, Diagnostic / statistics & numerical data
  • Sensitivity and Specificity
  • Singapore

Substances

  • HIV Antibodies
  • Reagent Kits, Diagnostic

Grants and funding

Salary support for Amy Chan was provided by National Healthcare Group, Singapore grant NHG-SIG/08003. This study was approved by the National Healthcare Group ethics review board. Written informed consent was obtained from all study participants. All study healthcare workers received Singapore Ministry of Health accredited training on point-of-care HIV rapid testing. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.