Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Clinical roundup
  1. Lewis Haddow1,
  2. Sophie Herbert2
  1. 1Research Department of Infection and Population Health, Centre for Sexual Health & HIV Research, University College London, London, UK
  2. 2Department of Genitourinary Medicine, Nottingham University Hospitals, Nottingham, UK
  1. Correspondence to Dr Lewis Haddow, Infection & Population Health, University College London, Centre for Sexual Health & HIV Research, 4th floor, Mortimer Market Centre, Capper Street, London WC1E 6JB, UK; lewis.haddow{at}

Statistics from

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

In April, it was reported in national news that licensed home HIV test kits were on sale in the UK for the first time.1 Of course, unlicensed (and potentially inaccurate)2 kits were available online more than 10 years ago, but a Spanish survey of >3000 men who have sex with men (MSM) conducted between 2010 and 2012 found that <10% knew that unauthorised tests were available online and <1% had used them.3 Home test kits have been available since 2013 in the USA; these are oral fluid tests, in contrast to the finger-stick blood test kit now on sale in the UK. A recent study found that a different finger-stick blood test for home use was more sensitive and specific than any of the four oral fluid kits tested.4 There are several arguments for and against home HIV testing, and this month's Clinical Round-up touches on the evidence that might support these arguments. In general, there is little research from the UK in …

View Full Text


  • Contributors Both authors contributed to background reading and writing the article, with LH as the lead on this occasion.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Provenance and peer review Commissioned; internally peer reviewed.