Acceptability, feasibility and appropriateness of intensified health education, SMS/phone tracing and transport reimbursement for uptake of voluntary medical male circumcision in a sexually transmitted infections clinic in Malawi: mixed-methods study

Introduction: Uptake of voluntary medical male circumcision (VMMC) remains a challenge in many settings. Innovative implementation strategies are required to scale-up VMMC uptake. Methodology: RITe was a multi-faceted intervention comprising transport reimbursement (R), intensified health education (IHE) and SMS/Telephone tracing (Te), which increased the uptake of VMMC among uncircumcised men with sexually transmitted infections (STIs) in Malawi. Using a concurrent exploratory mixed-method approach, we assessed the intervention’s acceptability, feasibility and appropriateness among men with STIs and healthcare workers (HCWs) at Bwaila District Hospital. Participants completed Likert scale surveys and participated in-depth interviews (IDIs) and focus group discussions (FGDs). We calculated percentages of responses to survey items and summarized common themes using thematic analysis. Median scores and interquartile ranges (IQR) were calculated for acceptability, feasibility and appropriateness of each strategy at baseline and end-line and compared using the Wilcoxon signed rank test. Results: A total of 300 surveys, 17 IDIs and 4 FGDs were conducted with men and HCWs between baseline and end-line. The mean age for men in the survey was 29 years (SD ±8) and most were married/cohabiting (59.3%). Mean age for HCWs was 38.5 years (SD ±7), and most were female (59.1%). For acceptability, participants agreed that RITe was welcome, approvable, and likable. Despite participants agreeing that RITe was a good idea, culture and religion influenced appropriateness, particularly at baseline, which improved at end-line for Te and R. For feasibility, HCWs agreed that RITe was easy to implement, but expressed concerns that R (end-line median = 4, IQR: 2, 4) and Te (end-line median = 4, IQR: 4, 4), were resource intensive, hence unsustainable. Interviews corroborated the survey results. Participants reported that IHE provided important information, Te was a good reminder and R was attractive, but they reported barriers to R and Te such as electricity, limited access to phones and distrust in the government. Conclusions: The RITe intervention was acceptable, feasible and appropriate. However, culture/religion and structural barriers affected perceptions of appropriateness and feasibility, respectively. Continued awareness raising on VMMC and addressing setting-specific structural factors are required to overcome barriers that impede demand-creation interventions for VMMC. ### Competing Interest Statement The authors have declared no competing interest. ### Clinical Trial NCT04677374 ### Funding Statement Yes ### Author Declarations I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained. Yes The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below: The National Health Sciences Research Committee of Malawi (NHSRC#: 19/10/2412). The University of the Witwatersrand Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC#: M200328). The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Ethics Review Board (IRB#: 19-2559). I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals. Yes I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance). Yes I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable. Yes Data cannot be shared publicly because of the country ethics and institutional policy. Data are available from the UNC Project Malawi Institutional Data Access (contact via mmatoga@unclilongwe.org) for researchers who meet the criteria for access to confidential data.