Skip to main content
Download PDF

HIV testing among incarcerated people with a history of HIV-related high-risk behaviours in Iran: Findings from three consecutive national bio-behavioural surveys

BMC Infectious Diseases volume 22, Article number: 907 (2022) Cite this article

Abstract

Background

Incarcerated people are at a disproportionate risk of contracting HIV. We estimated the prevalence and correlates of HIV testing among incarcerated people with a history of HIV-related high-risk behaviours in Iran.

Methods

Data for this analysis were obtained from three consecutive nationwide bio-behavioural surveillance surveys of a random sample of incarcerated people in 2009 (n = 5953), 2013 (n = 5490), and 2017 (n = 5785). History of testing for HIV in the last 12 months was the primary outcome variable. HIV testing was examined among those with a history of HIV-related high-risk behaviours (i.e., having multiple sex partnerships, injection drug use practices, or a history of having a tattoo). The outcome variable was divided into three categories: Never tested for HIV, ever tested for HIV inside the prison in the last 12 months, and ever tested for HIV outside the prison in the last 12 months. We used multivariable multinomial logistic regression models to examine factors associated with HIV testing.

Results

Overall, 8,553 participants with a history of HIV-related high-risk behaviors with valid responses to the HIV testing question were included in the analysis. Although HIV testing inside prison has increased (23% [2009], 21.5% [2013], and 50.3% [2017]: P-value < 0.001), the prevalence of HIV testing outside prison has decreased (7.7% [2009], 7.5% [2013], 4.1% [2017]: P-value < 0.001) over time. Our multivariable multinomial regression model showed older age (Relative-risk ratio [RRR]: 1.24, 95% Confidence Intervals [CI]: 1.05, 1.47), history of the previous incarceration (RRR: 1.46, 95% CI: 1.24, 1.71), currently receiving methadone maintenance therapy inside prison (RRR: 2.09, 95% CI: 1.81, 2.43), having access to condoms inside prison (RRR: 1.42, 95% CI: 1.20, 1.68) and sufficient HIV knowledge (RRR: 1.74, 95% CI: 1.47, 2.05) were significantly associated with an increased probability of having an HIV test in the last 12 months inside prison.

Conclusion

HIV testing among high-risk Iranian prisoners has increased from 2009 to 2017. However, HIV testing remains considerably low, and half of the incarcerated people with a history of HIV-related high-risk behaviours had never tested for HIV inside prison. Evidence-based programs are needed to optimize HIV testing inside and outside prisons and identify those at greater risk of HIV.

Peer Review reports

Background

Incarcerated people are at a higher risk of contracting or transmitting HIV than the general population, primarily due to their engagement in HIV-related high-risk behaviours (e.g., injection drug use, tattooing [1], and unprotected sexual practices) as well as the populated nature of prison settings [2,3,4]. Incarcerated people could also be a bridging population and help transmit HIV to other subpopulations, such as their partners [5,6,7,8].

In Iran, where 97% of incarcerated people are men [9], about half of the incarcerated people face drug-related charges, and up to 70% use illicit drugs [4, 10,11,12,13]. In particular, incarcerated people who inject drugs (PWID) play an essential role in spreading HIV inside the prisons through sharing needles and syringe practices [14]. The first HIV outbreak inside prisons in Iran occurred in 1998 [15], documenting an all-time high HIV prevalence of 4.5%. After the outbreak, HIV prevalence was reported to be as high as 13.2% across certain prison settings [15]. As a response to the growing HIV epidemic among incarcerated people in Iran, harm reduction programs and triangular clinics were initiated in 2002 and scaled up across several major prisons in the country [16, 17]; interventions that helped curb the epidemic and reduce the HIV prevalence among incarcerated people to 2.1% in 2009 [12, 18]. Harm reduction services inside prisons in Iran include methadone maintenance therapy (MMT), free condoms for conjugal visits, and HIV testing and counseling [17, 19, 20]. Incarcerated people who report a history of HIV-related high-risk behaviours are provided with a voluntary HIV test upon entrance to the prison. Once inside prisons, HIV tests are available through both voluntary provider-initiated and client-initiated testing inside prison health clinics. HIV testing and treatment services outside prisons are free and voluntary for all [21, 22].

Despite the importance of assessing HIV testing rates among incarcerated people as a key population at risk of HIV, most previous studies in Iran have highlighted the unmet need for HIV testing among female sex workers (FSW) and PWID [23,24,25]. Harm reduction services, including voluntary counseling and HIV testing, were rapidly scaled up across prison settings in all provinces in Iran [26]. However, studies on HIV testing among incarcerated people in Iran remain limited, and data on the actual coverage of these services are rare. This study utilizes data from three repeated bio-behavioural surveillance surveys (BBSS) in 2009, 2013, and 2017 to assess HIV testing among a random sample of incarcerated people with a history of HIV-related high-risk behaviours. We also examined factors associated with HIV testing among incarcerated people in Iran.

Methods

Study setting and data collection

Three national BBSS were conducted among Iranian incarcerated people in 2009, 2013, and 2017. The design, sampling, and data collection approaches were harmonized across the three surveys and have been described elsewhere [12]. A multi-stage cluster sampling approach was designed to reduce the design effect and increase the precision of the study. Based on the median number of incarcerated people in each prison facility, the prisons in the country were first divided into two large and small categories to address the intra-class correlation due to the size of the prison. The number of samples needed in large and small prisons was determined according to the population of each category. In brief, the prison settings were categorized into two strata of large (n = 16) and small (n = 17) prisons based on the median number of incarcerated people. In 2009, 533 participants from small and 5380 participants from large prisons were recruited. The respective sample sizes for these two strata were 549 and 4881 participants in 2013 and 1120 and 4665 participants in 2017. Data in three surveys were collected through a multi-stage random sampling approach. Systematic random sampling was used to recruit eligible incarcerated people.

The eligibility criteria across all surveys were being incarcerated for at least one week, having not participated in a similar study in the previous two months, and providing verbal informed consent [27]. Gender-matched trained interviewers conducted face-to-face interviews in a private room inside the prisons. Although the sections in the questionnaire were similar across the three surveys in 2009, 2013, and 2017, slight modifications were applied to the questionnaire in 2013 and 2017 based on the feedback received from regional experts and the Ministry of Health.

Outcome variable

As routine HIV testing is recommended for people at a high risk of HIV, we restricted the analysis to those with a history of HIV-related high-risk behaviours, including a history of injection drug use, multiple-sex partnerships (two or more partners at the same time), and having had a tattoo (ever). The primary outcome variable in this study was “having completed an HIV test in the last 12 months”. The primary outcome had three options (never tested vs. tested inside a prison in the last 12 months vs. tested outside a prison in the last 12 months). Incarcerated people were questioned: “Have you ever tested for HIV?” If no, they were coded as “never tested.” If yes, they were asked, “When did you last test for HIV?” and “Where did you last test for HIV?”. Participants who had a test during the last 12 months and inside the prison were considered to be “tested inside a prison in the last 12 months”. Participants who had a test during the last 12 months and outside the prison were considered to “test outside a prison in the last 12 months”.

Covariates

Socio-demographic factors of interest were sex (male vs. female), age at interview (≤ 29 vs. >29) [28, 29], current marital status (single [i.e., never married] vs. married vs. other [i.e., divorced, widowed or temporary marriage/sigheh]), educational level (illiterate or primary school vs. secondary school or high school vs. college education).

Data were also recorded on drug use and sexual risk behaviours, history of previous incarcerations (yes vs. no), lifetime history of alcohol consumption (yes vs. no), lifetime history of illicit drug use (yes vs. no), current receipt of MMT (yes vs. no), having access to sterile syringe inside prison (yes vs. no), age at first sex (< 18 vs. ≥18 years), and having access to condom inside prison (yes vs. no). We also measured HIV knowledge (sufficient vs. insufficient [eight questions were asked about HIV transmission; >4 correct responses were coded as sufficient and otherwise as insufficient]) and self-perceived risk of HIV (yes vs. no).

Statistical analysis

Descriptive statistics, including frequencies, percentages, and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI), were reported for HIV testing inside and outside of prison in the last 12 months. People living with HIV who knew their HIV status were excluded from the analysis. Bivariable and multivariable multinomial logistic regression models were built to compare the probability of having an HIV test in the last 12 months among different subgroups of incarcerated people after merging the data from three rounds of surveys and adjusting for the year of data collection. Variables with a p-value less than < 0.2 in the bivariable multinomial logistic regression model were entered into the multivariable multinomial logistic regression model. The final model was chosen through the backward elimination method using Wald statistics. Survey analysis using the Svy package in Stata /SE 14.0 (Stata Corp LP; College Station, Texas, USA) was used to analyze the data. Analyses were adjusted for prison’s sample sizes by applying appropriate sampling weights. A sensitivity analysis was conducted to assess correlates of HIV testing across different surveys in 2009, 2013, and 2017 through separate regression analyses (Additional file 1).

Results

Demographic characteristics and the prevalence of HIV testing

Of the 5953 participants in the 2009 survey, 3364 (56.5%) participants had a history of HIV-related high-risk behaviours (4.0% with a history of injection drug use, 46.3% having a tattoo, and 49.7% having multiple sex partners). Additionally, of the 5490 participants in 2013, 3,449 (62.8%; 5.6% with a history of injection drug use, 53.5% having a tattoo, 40.9% having multiple sex partnership), and out of 5785 participants in 2017, 3,353 (58.0%; 12.9% with a history of injection drug use, 48.9% having a tattoo, and 38.2% having multiple sex partnership) had a history of HIV-related high-risk behaviours and were included in this analysis. Among the 2009 survey participants, 97.6% (n = 2811) were male, 52.1% (n = 1500) were > 29, 45.7% (n = 1309) were single, and 55.5% (n = 1598) had secondary or high school education. In the 2013 survey, 98.8% (n = 2770) were male, 69.7% (n = 1945) were in > 29 years, 46.2% (n = 1294) were married, 51.9% (n = 1451) were secondary or high school education. In the 2017 survey, 96.1% (n = 2756) were male, 72.9% (n = 2086) were in > 29 years, 41.3% (n = 1185) were single, 61.8% (n = 1770) had secondary or high school education (Table 1).

Table 1 HIV testing inside and outside a prison in the last 12 months among incarcerated people
Full size table

Among 2,880 included participants in 2009, 661 (23.0%, 95% CI: 21.4, 24.5) participants had tested for HIV inside the prison in the last 12 months. Also, 223 (7.7%, 95% CI: 6.8, 8.7) participants had tested for HIV outside the prison in the last 12 months. Of the 2,804 included participants in 2013, 603 (21.5%, 95% CI: 20.0, 23.1) had a history of HIV test inside the prison in the last 12 months, and 211 (7.5%, 95% CI: 6.6, 8.5) had a history of HIV test outside the prison in the last 12 months. In 2017, of the 2,869 included participants, 1,442 participants had a history of HIV test inside the prison in the last 12 months (50.3%, 95% CI: 48.4, 52.1) and 119 (4.1%, 95% CI: 3.5, 4.9) participants with an HIV test outside the prison in last 12 months (Fig. 1).

Fig. 1
figure 1

HIV testing among incarcerated people with a history of high-risk behaviours a(P-value < 0. 001). aHIV-related High-risk behaviours were considered a history of injection drug use (ever), having multiple sex partnerships (the last 12 months), or having had a tattoo (ever)

Full size image

Correlates of having an HIV test in the last 12 months inside and outside prison

In the bivariable regression model, sex, age at interview, current marital status, educational level, history of previous incarceration, lifetime history of drug use, current receipt of MMT, having access to condoms inside prison, and sufficient HIV knowledge were significantly associated with having an HIV test in the last 12 months inside prison. In addition, age at the interview, current marital status, educational level, and sufficient HIV knowledge were associated with having an HIV test in the last 12 months outside prison (Table 2).

Table 2 Bivariable multinomial logistic regression on HIV testing in the last 12 months among incarcerated people (n = 8553)
Full size table

Our multivariable regression model showed that > 29 years of age (Relative-risk ratio (RRR): 1.24, 95% CI: 1.05, 1.47), history of previous incarceration (RRR: 1.46, 95% CI: 1.24, 1.71), current receipt of MMT inside prison (RRR: 2.09, 95% CI: 1.81, 2.43), having access to condoms inside prison (RRR: 1.42, 95% CI: 1.20, 1.68), and sufficient HIV knowledge (RRR: 1.74, 95% CI: 1.47, 2.05) were significantly associated with an increased probability of having an HIV test in the last 12 months inside prison. No covariate was significantly associated with the probability of having an HIV test in the last 12 months outside prison (Table 3).

Table 3 Multivariable Multinomial logistic regression on HIV testing in the last 12 months among incarcerated (n = 8529)
Full size table

Discussion

We assessed HIV testing among incarcerated people with a history of HIV-related high-risk behaviours in Iran. We found that in 2009 and 2013, about one-fifth of the eligible participants had a history of HIV testing inside the prison; however, half of the eligible incarcerated people had a history of HIV testing inside the prison in 2017. More incarcerated people in this study had tested inside rather than outside prisons. While this could be partly due to the improvement of harm reduction programs inside prison settings and the availability of HIV testing in Iran’s prisons [15], it could also point to potential structural barriers to testing and socio-economic vulnerabilities among incarcerated people before or after incarceration. Indeed, there was no significant association between HIV testing outside the prison and related variables. HIV testing outside the prison was lower, with around 7% prevalence in 2009 and 2013 and 4% in 2017. We found incarcerated people who were older, had a history of previous incarceration, were currently receiving MMT inside prison, had access to condoms inside prison and sufficient knowledge about HIV transmission, and had a higher chance for HIV testing inside the prison. Also, there was no significant association between HIV testing outside the prison and the main variables.

We found that HIV testing inside prisons had increased in 2017 compared to the 2009 and 2013 surveys. This increase in HIV testing could be due to improved prison harm reduction programs. Indeed, triangular clinics inside prisons in Iran provide HIV testing and counseling and educational materials about HIV prevention. Such facilities were vital in reaching high-risk incarcerated people and controlling the HIV epidemic in the early 2000s inside prisons in Iran [15]. Although the impact of expanding harm reduction services inside prisons has not yet been systematically evaluated, the result of a modelling study in Iran suggests the interventions inside prisons may have reduced the national HIV transmission rate and highlights the importance of continued investments in these services and interventions inside prisons [30]. Given the existing gap in HIV testing uptake, following an opt-out testing approach could be beneficial inside prisons in Iran.

We also found that HIV testing inside the prisons was higher among older people. Age could influence HIV testing via different pathways (e.g., through increased awareness of HIV risks) [31, 32], and lower levels of HIV testing among younger men have reflected their lower perception of risk [33]. However, the impact of age on HIV testing is equivocal in the literature. For example, a study in 2003 in Ontario, Canada, suggested that getting older was negatively associated with HIV testing among incarcerated people [34]. However, Rosen et al. showed that HIV testing increased with age among incarcerated people in North Carolina [35]. Our findings highlight the need for age-specific interventions inside prisons to ensure younger people are well-informed about HIV-related risk behaviours and the importance of routine HIV testing.

We also found that incarcerated people with a history of previous incarceration, currently receiving MMT inside prison, access to condoms inside prison, and sufficient knowledge about HIV transmission had a higher probability of HIV testing inside the prison. This finding highlights that harm reduction services inside prisons might have been impactful in encouraging incarcerated people with a higher risk of drug use and sexual behaviour profiles to engage in HIV testing; as shown by our findings in 2009, the prevalence of HIV testing among the incarcerated people has remained low [36]. However, the association between sufficient knowledge about HIV transmission and HIV testing is interesting and could be a helpful finding to control HIV in the context of this population in Iran. Indeed, those with sufficient knowledge about HIV transmission may prefer to test for HIV, and HIV testing could itself increase their HIV knowledge. The findings of a systematic review indicated that being tested without wanting an HIV test was associated with lower HIV knowledge [37]. Moreover, elevating HIV knowledge creates motivation for risk reduction and has been associated with HIV testing and treatment uptake [38]. Therefore, incarcerated people must be supported and encouraged to take advantage of education, services, and facilities for reducing HIV infection and transmission to others.

We acknowledge the limitations of our study. First, the cross-sectional nature of our surveys limited the drawing of any causal inference in the observed associations. Second, the self-reported nature of our data makes it prone to social desirability and recall biases. As some of the behaviours asked in the interview were sensitive (e.g., homosexual sex, sex work, or injection behaviors), some people may not have disclosed their behaviors. Third, we did not measure the availability of antiretroviral treatment after HIV testing for people living with HIV, which could be explored in future studies. Lastly, we did not measure the barriers to HIV testing inside and outside the prisons. We recommend future quantitative and qualitative studies to examine the obstacles to HIV testing among incarcerated people.

Conclusion

While the increasing prevalence of HIV testing inside prisons in Iran is encouraging, our findings indicate that incarcerated people’s HIV testing practices are still considerably low both inside and outside prisons in Iran. Our findings highlight the need to revisit and re-evaluate existing HIV testing policies and services inside and outside prison settings to help improve HIV testing uptake among this subpopulation. Scaling up rapid tests and routine opt-out HIV testing services could help encourage incarcerated people to further use the available harm reduction facilities inside and outside prisons.

Availability of data and materials

The Ministry of Health and Medical Education (MOH) of Iran and the Iranian prison office own the data. After the permission of the MOH and Prison office, data will be available upon request submitted to info@hivhub.ir (the HIV/STI Surveillance Research Center).

Abbreviations

RRR:

Relative-risk ratio

PWID:

People who inject drugs

MMT:

Methadone maintenance therapy

FSW:

Female sex workers

BBSS:

Bio-behavioural surveillance surveys

CI:

Confidence Intervals

TCs:

Triangular clinics

References

  1. Moazen B, Saeedi Moghaddam S, Silbernagl MA, Lotfizadeh M, Bosworth RJ, Alammehrjerdi Z, et al. Prevalence of drug injection, sexual activity, tattooing, and piercing among prison inmates. Epidemiol Rev. 2018;40(1):58–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Dolan K, Wirtz AL, Moazen B, Ndeffo-Mbah M, Galvani A, Kinner SA, et al. Global burden of HIV, viral hepatitis, and tuberculosis in prisoners and detainees. The Lancet. 2016;388(10049):1089–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Golrokhi R, Farhoudi B, Taj L, Pahlaviani FG, Mazaheri-Tehrani E, Cossarizza A, et al. HIV prevalence and correlations in prisons in different regions of the world: a review article. Open AIDS J. 2018;12:81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Akbari M, Akbari M, Naghibzadeh-Tahami A, Joulaei H, Nasiriyan M, Hesampour M, et al. Prevalence of HIV/AIDS among iranian prisoners: a review article. Addict health. 2016;8(3):195.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Valera P, Chang Y, Lian Z. HIV risk inside US prisons: a systematic review of risk reduction interventions conducted in US prisons. AIDS Care. 2017;29(8):943–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Mirzazadeh A, Shokoohi M, Navadeh S, Danesh A, Jain JP, Sedaghat A, et al. Underreporting in HIV-related high-risk behaviors: comparing the results of multiple data collection methods in a behavioral survey of prisoners in Iran. Prison J. 2018;98(2):213–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Adams J, Nowels C, Corsi K, Long J, Steiner JF, Binswanger IA. HIV risk after release from prison: a qualitative study of former inmates. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2011;57(5):429.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Nelwan EJ, Diana A, van Crevel R, Alam NN, Alisjahbana B, Pohan HT, et al. Indonesian prisons and HIV: part of the problem, part of the solution. Acta Med Indones. 2009;41(Suppl 1):52–6.

    Google Scholar 

  9. World Prison Brief [Internet]. Available from [https://www.prisonstudies.org/country/iran]. Accessed 10 Nov 2022.

  10. Assari S, Yarmohamadivasel M, Moghani Lankarani M, Sehat M, Narenjiha H, Rafiey H, et al. Having multiple sexual partners among iranian intra-venous drug users. Front Psychiatry. 2014;5:125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Ghasemzadeh I, Zare Shahri R, Namazi SA, Sadeghi P, Namazi SS, Ghasemzade A. Review of HIV risk factors in prison inmates in Iran. Life Sci J. 2014;11(4s):236–9.

  12. Navadeh S, Mirzazadeh A, Gouya MM, Farnia M, Alasvand R, Haghdoost A-A. HIV prevalence and related risk behaviours among prisoners in Iran: results of the national biobehavioural survey, 2009. Sex Transm Infect. 2013;89(Suppl 3):iii33–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. SeyedAlinaghi SA, Farhoudi B, Mohraz M, Pahlaviani FG, Hosseini M, Farnia M, et al. Prevalence and correlates of HIV infection among male prisoners in Tehran, Iran. Arch Iran Med. 2017;20(6):356–60.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Amin-Esmaeili M, Rahimi‐Movaghar A, Haghdoost Aa, Mohraz M. Evidence of HIV epidemics among non‐injecting drug users in I ran: a systematic review. Addiction. 2012;107(11):1929–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Haghdoost A-A, Mirzazadeh A, Shokoohi M, Sedaghat A, Gouya MM. HIV trend among iranian prisoners in 1990 s and 2000 s; analysis of aggregated data from HIV sentinel sero-surveys. Harm Reduct J. 2013;10(1):1–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Alam-Mehrjerdi Z, Abdollahi M, Higgs P, Dolan K. Drug use treatment and harm reduction programs in Iran: a unique model of health in the most populated Persian Gulf country. Asian J Psychiatry. 2015;16:78–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Nissaramanesh B, Trace M, Roberts M. The rise of harm reduction in the Islamic Republic of Iran. Beckley Foundation Drug Policy Programme, Briefing Paper. 2005;8.

  18. Himmich H, Madani N. The state of harm reduction in the Middle East and North Africa: a focus on Iran and Morocco. Int J Drug Policy. 2016;31:184–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Roshanfekr P, Farnia M, Dejman M. The effectiveness of harm reduction programs in seven prisons of Iran. Iran J public health. 2013;42(12):1430.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Eshrati B, Asl RT, Dell CA, Afshar P, Millson PM, Kamali M, et al. Preventing HIV transmission among iranian prisoners: initial support for providing education on the benefits of harm reduction practices. Harm Reduct J. 2008;5(1):1–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. HIV/AIDS JUNPo. Global AIDS response progress reporting. Egypt Geneva: UNAIDS; 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Farhoudi B, SeyedAlinaghi S, Tabarsi P, Mohraz M, Golrokhy R, Farnia M, et al. Revision and implementation of “Clinical Guideline for tuberculosis and HIV in Prisons”, Great Tehran Prison, Iran. Infect Disord Drug Targets. 2018;18(1):72–80.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Shokoohi M, Karamouzian M, Osooli M, Sharifi H, Fahimfar N, Haghdoost A, et al. Low HIV testing rate and its correlates among men who inject drugs in Iran. Int J Drug Policy. 2016;32:64–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Shokoohi M, Karamouzian M, Khajekazemi R, Osooli M, Sharifi H, Haghdoost AA, et al. Correlates of HIV testing among female sex workers in Iran: findings of a national bio-behavioural surveillance survey. PLoS ONE. 2016;11(1):e0147587.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Shokoohi M, Noori A, Karamouzian M, Sharifi H, Khajehkazemi R, Fahimfar N, et al. Remaining gap in HIV testing uptake among female sex workers in Iran. AIDS Behav. 2017;21(8):2401–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Saberi Zafarghandi MB, Eshrati S, Arezoomandan R, Farnia M, Mohammadi H, Vahed N, et al. Review, Documentation, Assessment of Treatment, and Harm Reduction Programs of Substance Use Disorder in iranian prisons. Iran J Psychiatry Clin Psychol. 2021;27(1):48–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Shahesmaeili A, Shokoohi M, Tavakoli F, Rabiee MH, Kamali K, Haghdoost AA, et al. Prevalence of Symptom-based sexually transmitted infections and related factors among incarcerated men in Iran, 2013. Med J Islamic Repub Iran (MJIRI). 2021;35(1):1269–74.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Perovic B. Defining youth in contemporary national legal and policy frameworks across Europe. Partnership between the European Commission and the Council of Europe in the field of youth. 2016.

  29. Khezri M, Mirzazadeh A, McFarland W, Iranpour A, Shahesmaeili A, Zarei J, et al. Prevalence of substance use and associated risk factors among homeless youth in Iran: a cross-sectional study. Child Youth Serv Rev. 2020;116:105070.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Haghdoost AA, Mostafavi E, Mirzazadeh A, Navadeh S, Feizzadeh A, Fahimfar N, et al. Modelling of HIV/AIDS in Iran up to 2014. J AIDS HIV Res. 2011;3(12):231–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Tabana H, Doherty T, Swanevelder S, Lombard C, Jackson D, Zembe W, et al. Knowledge of HIV status prior to a community HIV counseling and testing intervention in a rural district of South Africa: results of a community based survey. BMC Infect Dis. 2012;12(1):1–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Jean K, Anglaret X, Moh R, Lert F, Dray-Spira R. Barriers to HIV testing in Côte d’Ivoire: the role of individual characteristics and testing modalities. PLoS ONE. 2012;7(7):e41353.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Anderson KG, Beutel AM, Maughan-Brown B. HIV risk perceptions and first sexual intercourse among youth in Cape Town, South Africa. Int Fam Plan Perspect. 2007;33(3):98–105. https://doi.org/10.1363/ifpp.33.098.07.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Burchell AN, Calzavara LM, Myers T, Schlossberg J, Millson M, Escobar M, et al. Voluntary HIV testing among inmates: sociodemographic, behavioral risk, and attitudinal correlates. JAIDS J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2003;32(5):534–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Rosen DL, Schoenbach VJ, Wohl DA, White BL, Stewart PW, Golin CE. An evaluation of HIV testing among inmates in the North Carolina prison system. Am J Public Health. 2009;99(S2):452-S9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Ohiri K, Claeson M, Rassaghi E, Nassirimanesh B, Afshar P, Power R. HIVAIDS prevention among injection drug users: learning from harm reduction in Iran. Iran: HIV Prevention Consultation. 2006, 17–20.

  37. Grodensky CA, Rosen DL, Hino S, Golin CE, Wohl DA. Opt-out HIV testing of inmates in North Carolina prisons: factors associated with not wanting a test and not knowing they were tested. AIDS Behav. 2016;20(4):859–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Tulloch HE, Balfour L, Kowal J, Tasca GA, Angel JB, Garber G, et al. HIV knowledge among canadian-born and sub-saharan african-born patients living with HIV. J Immigr Minor Health. 2012;14(1):132–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors are grateful to the HIV/STI office at the Ministry of Health and the Prison Health office for their technical and administrative support of the study. We would also like to acknowledge the prison staff who assisted us during the data collection phase. Our gratitude also goes to the incarcerated people who participated in the study. Both studies received funding from the Global Fund and technical support from Iran’s Center for Disease Control. Mohammad Karamouzian was supported by a Banting Postdoctoral Fellowship when this study was completed.

Funding

Three studies received funding from the Global Fund and technical support from Iran’s Center for Disease Control and supported by United Nations Development Programme (NUDP), The Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria.

Author information

Author notes

  1. Fatemeh Tavakoli and Najmeh Parhizgari contributed equally as co-first authors; Mohammad Karamouzian and Hamid Sharifi contributed equally as senior authors.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. HIV/STI Surveillance Research Center, and WHO Collaborating Center for HIV Surveillance, Institute for Futures Studies in Health, Kerman University of Medical Sciences, Kerman, Iran

    Fatemeh Tavakoli, Mostafa Shokoohi, Mehrdad Khezri, Ali Akbar Haghdoost, Iman Ghasemzadeh, Armita Shahesmaeili, Naser Nasiri, Mohammad Karamouzian & Hamid Sharifi

  2. Medical Virology Department, School of Public Health, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

    Najmeh Parhizgari

  3. Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada

    Mostafa Shokoohi

  4. WHO Collaborating Centre for HIV Strategic Information, School of Medicine, Zagreb, Croatia

    Ivana Bozicevic

  5. Golestan Research Center of Psychiatry, Golestan University of Medical Sciences, Gorgan, Iran

    Ahmad Danesh

  6. Centre on Drug Policy Evaluation, St. Michael’s Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada

    Mohammad Karamouzian

  7. Brown School of Public Health, Brown University, Providence, RI, USA

    Mohammad Karamouzian

Authors
  1. Fatemeh Tavakoli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Najmeh Parhizgari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mostafa Shokoohi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Mehrdad Khezri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Ali Akbar Haghdoost
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Iman Ghasemzadeh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Ivana Bozicevic
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Armita Shahesmaeili
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Naser Nasiri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Ahmad Danesh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Mohammad Karamouzian
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Hamid Sharifi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Design and conduct the survey: MS, MK, HSH. Data collection: FT, MKH, NN, AD. Data analysis: FT, NP. Supervision: MK, HSH, AAH. Writing-original draft: FT, NP. Writing, review, and editing: FT, NP, MS, MKH, AAH, IGH, IB, ASH, NN, AD, MK, HSH. All authors read the manuscript and approved the final version of the manuscript.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Mohammad Karamouzian or Hamid Sharifi.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

All participants were informed about the aim of the study. Participation was entirely voluntary, and all participants provided verbal consent for the interview. The study protocol and verbal consent was reviewed and approved by the Ethical Committee of Kerman University of Medical Sciences. All methods were performed following the relevant guidelines and regulations. (Reference number: K/93/207, IR.KMU.REC.1394.609).

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Additional file 1.

 Multivariable Multinomial logistic regression on HIV testing in thelast 12 months among incarcerated in 2009, 2013, and 2017.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Tavakoli, F., Parhizgari, N., Shokoohi, M. et al. HIV testing among incarcerated people with a history of HIV-related high-risk behaviours in Iran: Findings from three consecutive national bio-behavioural surveys. BMC Infect Dis 22, 907 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12879-022-07897-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12879-022-07897-z

Keywords

BMC Infectious Diseases

ISSN: 1471-2334

Contact us