TABLE 2.
Prevalence and Predictors of Uptake and HIV Diagnostic Yield for HBT Versus CBT
| HBT |
CBT |
||
|---|---|---|---|
| Characteristic | Mean (Range) or n (%) | P | |
|
| |||
| Caregivers’ initial preference of testing location (n = 492*) | 115 (23) | 377 (77) | |
| Eligible children per caregiver | 2 (1–6) | 2 (1–8) | 0.005§ |
| Caregivers with 1 child | 45 (18) | 205 (82) | |
| Caregivers with 2 children | 47 (28) | 118 (72) | |
| Caregivers with 3+ children | 23 (30) | 54 (70) | |
| Caregivers completing testing for at least 1 child (n = 347) | 69 (20)† | 278 (80)‡ | |
| Children tested per caregiver | 2 (1–5) | 1 (1–4) | 0.0003§ |
| Caregivers with 1 child | 33 (15) | 185 (85) | |
| Caregivers with 2 children | 24 (26) | 70 (74) | |
| Caregivers with 3+ children | 12 (34) | 23 (66) | |
| Children tested (n = 521) | 123 (24) | 398 (76) | |
| Child age (yr) | 7 (0–12) | 7 (0–12) | 0.282§ |
| Prevalence of HIV infection | 3 (2) | 27 (7) | 0.072∥ |
*
1 enrolled caregiver opted not to test their children.
†
4 of the 69 caregivers had initially chosen CBT, then switched to HBT
‡
12 of the 278 caregivers had initially chosen HBT, then switched to CBT.
§
Wilcoxon rank-sum test comparing the age of children tested at home versus children tested in clinic.
∥
χ2 test comparing proportion of children who tested HIV positive following HBT versus CBT.