Skip to main content

Table 1 Characteristics of 22 viral hepatitis testing programmes

From: Survey of programmatic experiences and challenges in delivery of hepatitis B and C testing in low- and middle-income countries

Programme characteristics

Total, n = 22 (%)

Geographic location of testing programmes

 Africa

9 (40.9)

 Europe

3 (13.6)

 South-East Asia

4 (18.2)

 Western Pacific

6 (27.3)

Income categories of countries where programmes conducted a n = 19 countries

 Low-income

7/19 (36.8)

 Lower-middle income

8/19 (42.1)

 Upper-middle

3/19 (15.8)

 High-income

1/19 (5.3)

Programme coverage

 National

7 (31.8)

 Regional

3 (13.6)

 Local

12 (54.5)

Number of testing sites

 More than five

7 (31.8)

 Two to five

6 (27.3)

 One

8 (36.4)

 Not indicated

1 (4.5)

Type of organisation leading programme

 Non-governmental or international organization

10 (45.5)

 Government

3 (13.6)

 Hospital

6 (27.3)

 Research institution

3 (13.6)

Duration of programme

 ≥ 5 years

9 (40.9)

 2 to 4 years

4 (18.2)

 ≤ 1 year

4 (18.2)

 No response

5 (22.7)

Target population and location of testing

 Target population for testing

  Specific target populations only

11 (50)

  General populationb only

2 (9.1)

  General and specific target populations

9 (40.9)

 Details of specific target population (multiple options possible)

  HIV positive

11 (50)

  PWID

10 (45.5)

  Clinical suspicion of hepatitis (Abnormal liver function tests or symptoms/signs)

6 (27.3)

  Sex worker

6 (27.3)

  Pregnant women

6 (27.3)

  Health care worker

6 (27.3)

  Prisoner

4 (18.2)

  Family of HBV/HCV/HIV positive

3 (13.6)

  Children of positive mothers

3 (13.6)

  MSM

3 (13.6)

  Otherc

5 (22.7)

  Testing setting (multiple options possible)

  Hospital-based

12 (54.5)

  HIV clinic

10 (45.5)

  Harm reduction service

6 (27.3)

  Primary health care facility

4 (18.2)

  Outreach programme

4 (18.2)

  Antenatal clinic

4 (18.2)

  Private sector

2 (9.1)

  Community

1 (4.5)

  Otherd

4 (18.2)

Approaches to testing

 Who initiates testing? (multiple options possible)

  Provider

19 (86.4)

  Client

8 (36.4)

  Not indicated

2 (9.1)

 Who delivers testing? (multiple options possible)

  Physician

11 (50)

  Laboratory technician

5 (22.7)

  Counsellor

5 (22.7)

  Nurse

4 (18.2)

  Other health care worker

4 (18.2)

  Othere

3 (13.6)

 Testing approach for HCV (20 programmes)f

  RDT standalone

12 (60, n = 20)

  EIA standalone

4 (20, n = 20)

  RDT/EIA + NAT

2 (30, n = 20)

  NAT standalone

1 (5, n = 20)

  Not indicated

1 (5, n = 20)

 Testing approach for HBV (22 programmes)g

  RDT standalone

11 (50)

  EIA standalone

6 (27.3)

  RDT/EIA + NAT

4 (18.2)

  Not indicated

1 (4.5)

 Integrated testing (multiple options possible)

  With HIV

8 (36.4)

  With HIV/HBV/HCV/Syphilis

6 (27.3)

  With HBV/HCV

4 (18.2)

  With HIV/HBV/HCV/TB

1 (4.5)

  No integrated testing

5 (22.7)

 Liver staging in those with positive test

  Not routinely done

6 (27.3)

  Yesh

16 (72.7)

 Counseling

  Pre−/post- counseling

15 (68.2)

  No counseling/or unknown

7 (31.8)

Access to treatment and funding

 Treatment availability

  HBVi

18 (81.8)

  HCV

14 (70, n = 20)

  No treatment for either HBV and HCV

2 (10, n = 20)

 Funding source for HCV testing (multiple options possible, 20 programmes)

  Support from NGO/IO/Government/Other donor

15 (75)

  Patient self-payment

7 (35)

  Private insurance

4 (20)

 Funding source for HBV testing (multiple options possible, 22 programmes)

  Support from NGO/IO/Government/Other donor

19 (86.4)

  Patient self-payment

8 (36.4)

  Private insurance

4 (18.2)

 Financial support for treatment

  For HBV

6 (27.3)

  For HCV

7 (35, n = 20)

  1. PWID people who inject drug, MSM men who have sex with men, RDT rapid diagnosed testing, EIA enzyme immunoassay, NAT nucleic acid testing, HIV human immunodeficiency virus, HBV hepatitis B virus, HCV hepatitis C virus, TB tuberculosis
  2. aBased on the World Bank classification in 2015 [57]; bGeneral population included general population and blood donor; cOther included non-injecting drug users, migrants, military and TB positive persons; dOther included two prisons, one HIV/TB clinic and one sexually transmitted infection clinic; eOther included self-testing; fRDT/EIA + NAT (n = 3) as an optional approach; gRDT/EIA + NAT (n = 2) as an optional approach to evaluate the treatment eligibility. One programme offered RDT standalone for blood donor screening; hFibroscan available (n = 9) and APRI score (n = 7); iHBV treatment only available for HBV-HIV co-infected persons and not for HBV mono-infected persons (n = 9)