Suchergebnisse

Optimal and strict adherence to Antiretroviral Viral Therapy a need for over the long period to achieve the goals of ART and obtain maximum benefits of ART. However, PLWHA find it very difficult to take ARVs drug as precisely as they should for a number of reasons. Therefore, this study aimed at examining the level of antiretroviral therapy adherence and identifying possible associated factors for ART adherence behavior in Jimma zone government ART facilities. A facility based cross-sectional study was conducted in the ART clinics of Jimma zone governmental health facilities in which ARV treatment supplied from November 25/2015 – February 30/2016 for a period of 4 months. 352 adult PLWHA (190 female and 162 male) ranged in age from 15-62 years (Mean=37.1, SD= 8.95), with 100% response rate, were our study participants. Binary logistic regression was used to perform bivariate and multivariate analyses to determine the association between study variables and ART adherence status. 259(73.6%) participants were adherent (>=95%) and 93(26.4%) were non-adherent (<95%) to the prescribed dose of ARV drugs over the past seven days prior to the interview. The main reasons for skipping the prescribed ARV drugs were, busyness (78.5%), having too many pills (71%), felt depressed (68.8%), taking the drugs reminded HIV infected (66.7%), did not want other see (62.4%), and felt asleep(60.2%). The last stepwise regression analysis revealed that, educational status, knowledge of HIV/AIDS, use of additional drugs and access to reliable pharmacy were significantly associated with ART adherence status. So, efforts to maximize ART adherence should focus on addressing these associated significant factors.

Optimal and strict adherence to Antiretroviral Viral Therapy a need for over the long period to achieve the goals of ART and obtain maximum benefits of ART. However, PLWHA find it very difficult to take ARVs drug as precisely as they should for a number of reasons. Therefore, this study aimed at examining the level of antiretroviral therapy adherence and identifying possible associated factors for ART adherence behavior in Jimma zone government ART facilities. A facility based cross-sectional study was conducted in the ART clinics of Jimma zone governmental health facilities in which ARV treatment supplied from November 25/2015 – February 30/2016 for a period of 4 months. 352 adult PLWHA (190 female and 162 male) ranged in age from 15-62 years (Mean=37.1, SD= 8.95), with 100% response rate, were our study participants. Binary logistic regression was used to perform bivariate and multivariate analyses to determine the association between study variables and ART adherence status. 259(73.6%) participants were adherent (>=95%) and 93(26.4%) were non-adherent (<95%) to the prescribed dose of ARV drugs over the past seven days prior to the interview. The main reasons for skipping the prescribed ARV drugs were, busyness (78.5%), having too many pills (71%), felt depressed (68.8%), taking the drugs reminded HIV infected (66.7%), did not want other see (62.4%), and felt asleep(60.2%). The last stepwise regression analysis revealed that, educational status, knowledge of HIV/AIDS, use of additional drugs and access to reliable pharmacy were significantly associated with ART adherence status. So, efforts to maximize ART adherence should focus on addressing these associated significant factors.

Background: Emerging researchers in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) face many barriers, including inadequacies in funding, international exposure and mentorship. In 2012, the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) funded five research hubs aimed at improving the research core for evidence-based mental health interventions, enhancing research skills in global mental health, and providing capacity building (CB) opportunities for early career investigators in LMIC. In this paper emerging researchers contextualize their experiences. Case presentation: Each of the five hubs purposively selected an emerging researcher who had experienced more than one hub-related CB opportunity and actively participated in hub-related clinical trial activities. The five 'voices' were invited to contribute narratives on their professional backgrounds, CB experience, challenges and successes as an emerging mental health researcher, and suggestions for future CB activities. These narratives are presented as case studies. CB activities provided broader learning opportunities for emerging researchers. Benefits included the receipt of research funding, hands-on training and mentorship, as well as exposure to networks and collaborative opportunities on a global scale. To overcome ongoing challenges of access to funding, mentoring, networking and global exposure, the emerging voices recommend making mentorship and training opportunities available to a wider range of emerging mental health researchers. Conclusions: Investing in CB is not enough to ensure sustainability and leave a legacy unless it is accompanied by ongoing mentorship and international exposure. Financial investment in building research capacity, promotion of mentorship and supervision, and international networking are essential to yield well-prepared young investigators in LMIC as experienced by these rising stars. Governments and policymakers should prioritize educational policies to support the continuous development and international engagement of emerging researchers. This can advance strategies to deal with one of most important and costly problems faced by healthcare systems in LMIC: the mental health treatment gap.

Background: Emerging researchers in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) face many barriers, including inadequacies in funding, international exposure and mentorship. In 2012, the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) funded five research hubs aimed at improving the research core for evidence-based mental health interventions, enhancing research skills in global mental health, and providing capacity building (CB) opportunities for early career investigators in LMIC. In this paper emerging researchers contextualize their experiences. Case presentation: Each of the five hubs purposively selected an emerging researcher who had experienced more than one hub-related CB opportunity and actively participated in hub-related clinical trial activities. The five 'voices' were invited to contribute narratives on their professional backgrounds, CB experience, challenges and successes as an emerging mental health researcher, and suggestions for future CB activities. These narratives are presented as case studies. CB activities provided broader learning opportunities for emerging researchers. Benefits included the receipt of research funding, hands-on training and mentorship, as well as exposure to networks and collaborative opportunities on a global scale. To overcome ongoing challenges of access to funding, mentoring, networking and global exposure, the emerging voices recommend making mentorship and training opportunities available to a wider range of emerging mental health researchers. Conclusions: Investing in CB is not enough to ensure sustainability and leave a legacy unless it is accompanied by ongoing mentorship and international exposure. Financial investment in building research capacity, promotion of mentorship and supervision, and international networking are essential to yield well-prepared young investigators in LMIC as experienced by these rising stars. Governments and policymakers should prioritize educational policies to support the continuous development and international engagement of emerging researchers. This can advance strategies to deal with one of most important and costly problems faced by healthcare systems in LMIC: the mental health treatment gap.