Skip to main content
. 2019 Jan 5;19:15. doi: 10.1186/s12889-018-6362-0

Table 1.

Characteristics of selected articles

Author/ citation Country Study aim Study design/type of data
Aho et al., (2011) [35] Guinea To describe the acceptability and outcomes of HTC among a stigmatised and vulnerable group. Baseline: Interview / FGDs & survey (n = 421) plus HIV screen. Follow-up survey (n = 223) plus HIV test; Sampling: attendees at private or public centres providing healthcare services.
Ameyan et al., (2015) [36] Ethiopia To explore the barriers to utilising HTC facilities and identify the motives and motivations of FSWs who seek HTC. Cross-sectional qualitative study; In-depth interviews with FSWs (20); Purposive sampling.
Batona et al., (2015) [42] Benin To identify psychosocial factors associated with the intention to be HIV tested. Cross-sectional study; Questionnaire survey (n = 450); Cluster sampling;
Dugas et al., (2015) [43] Benin To examine the potential of 3 different categories of outreach intervention to increase the use of testing services in Benin. Cross-sectional ethnographic study (semi-structure interviews (n = 66); Purposive sampling
Langa et al., (2014) [44] Mozambique. To assess HIV risk perception, sexual behaviour and treatment seeking among FSWs. In-depth semi-structured interviews & focus group discussions; n = 236 FSWs from three sites; Snowball sampling approach.
Nakanwagi et al., (2016) [45] Uganda To identify the facilitators and barriers to linkage to HIV care among FSWs who tested positive to design appropriate HIV interventions for this key population group. Cross-sectional qualitative study; In-depth interviews (n = 28 FSWs); Purposively selection of FSWs accessing HIV services from mobile outreaches.
Scorgie et al., (2013) [46] Kenya; Uganda; Zimbabwe; South Africa To examine experience of key populations in seeking public and private healthcare and barriers to accessing these services. Cross sectional qualitative study; In-depth interviews (n = 55) & focus group discussions; Snowball sampling.
Lafort et al., (2016) [47] Kenya, Mozambique; South Africa To assess where FSW go for care in different settings, and what motivates their choice. Multi-site cross-sectional survey (South Africa (n = 400), Tete, Mozambique (n = 308), Mombasa, Kenya (n = 400); Respondent-driven sampling (RDS).
Lafort (2016) [48] Mozambique Assess factors that facilitate or hinder utilisation of HIV and sexual and reproductive health services among FSWs. Cross-sectional survey (n = 311); together with In-depth interviews & Focus Group Discussion (FGDs); Respondent-driven sampling (RDS)
Luseno et al., (2009), [38] South Africa To identify factors that facilitates or hinders HIV testing among South African women with high risk for HIV infection. Randomised trial; baseline data (n = 425); Participant recruited through targeted street outreach.
Mulongo et al. (2015) [49] Democratic Republic of Congo To assess the impact of community-based prevention and HIV counselling and testing approaches in reaching FSWs with prevention messaging and treatment options. Participatory appraisal including follow-up testing, care, and treatment to HIV positive individuals; Snowball sampling
Renzaho et al., (2009) [37] Tanzania To explore the knowledge and practices about HIV among female sex workers (CSWs) and assess the contextual dynamics that prevent safer sexual behaviours. Semi-structured face-to-face interviews (=54) & discrete focus group discussions (n = 26); Snowball sampling approach.
Chanda et al., (2017) [41] Zambia To explore perceived barriers and facilitators of HIV testing among FSWs Cross-sectional; focus groups (N = 5), total participants = 40)
Wanyenze et al., (2017) [39] Uganda To explore barriers to HIV service access and opportunities for increasing access to services Cross-sectional study; focus group discussion (FGD) (n = 24), total participants = 190
Nyblade et al., (2017) [40] Kenya To explore the relationship between healthcare worker sex-work stigma and HIV counselling and testing & utilisation of non-HIV health services among female and male sex workers Cross-sectional survey; snowball sample of 497 FSWs