Suchergebnisse

AbstractIntroductionSouth Africa's National Department of Health launched the National Adherence Guidelines for Chronic Diseases in 2015. These guidelines include adherence clubs (AC) and decentralized medication delivery (DMD) as two differentiated models of care for stable HIV patients on antiretroviral therapy. While the adherence guidelines do not suggest that provider costs (costs to the healthcare system for medications, laboratory tests and visits to clinics or alternative locations) for stable patients in these differentiated models of care will be lower than conventional, clinic‐based care, recent modelling exercises suggest that such differentiated models could substantially reduce provider costs. In the context of continued implementation of the guidelines, we discuss the conditions under which provider costs of care for stable HIV patients could fall, or rise, with AC and DMD models of care in South Africa.DiscussionIn prior studies of HIV care and treatment costs, three main cost categories are antiretroviral medications, laboratory tests and general interaction costs based on encounters with health workers. Stable patients are likely to be on the national first‐line regimen (Tenofovir/Entricitabine/Efavarinz (TDF/FTC/EFV)), so no difference in the costs of medications is expected. Laboratory testing guidelines for stable patients are the same regardless of the model of care, so no difference in laboratory costs is expected as well. Based on existing information regarding the costs of clinic visits, AC visits and DMD drug pickups, we expect that for some clinics, visit costs for DMD or AC models of care could be less, but modestly so, than for conventional, clinic‐based care. For other clinics, however, DMD or AC models could have higher visit costs (see Table 2).ConclusionsThe standard of care for stable patients has already been "differentiated" for years in South Africa, prior to the roll out of the new adherence guidelines. AC and DMD models of care, when implemented as envisioned in the guidelines, are unlikely to generate substantive reductions or increases in provider costs of care.

AbstractIntroductionIn response to suboptimal adherence and retention, South Africa's National Department of Health developed and implemented National Adherence Guidelines for Chronic Diseases. We evaluated the effect of a package of adherence interventions beginning in January 2016 and report on the impact of Fast‐Track Treatment Initiation Counselling (FTIC) on ART initiation, adherence and retention.MethodsWe conducted a cluster‐randomized mixed‐methods evaluation in 4 provinces at 12 intervention sites which implemented FTIC and 12 control facilities providing standard of care. Follow‐up was by passive surveillance using clinical records. We included data on subjects eligible for FTIC between 08 Jan 2016 and 07 December 2016. We adjusted for pre‐intervention differences using difference‐in‐differences (DiD) analyses controlling for site‐level clustering.ResultsWe enrolled 362 intervention and 368 control arm patients. Thirty‐day ART initiation was 83% in the intervention and 82% in the control arm (RD 0.5%; 95% CI: −5.0% to 6.0%). After adjusting for baseline ART initiation differences and covariates using DiD we found a 6% increase in ART initiation associated with FTIC (RD 6.3%; 95% CI: −0.6% to 13.3%). We found a small decrease in viral suppression within 18 months (RD −2.8%; 95% CI: −9.8% to 4.2%) with no difference after adjustment (RD: −1.9%; 95% CI: −9.1% to 5.4%) or when considering only those with a viral load recorded (84% intervention vs. 86% control). We found reduced crude 6‐month retention in intervention sites (RD −7.2%; 95% CI: −14.0% to −0.4%). However, differences attenuated by 12 months (RD: −3.6%; 95% CI: −11.1% to 3.9%). Qualitative data showed FTIC counselling was perceived as beneficial by patients and providers.ConclusionsWe saw a short‐term ART‐initiation benefit to FTIC (particularly in districts where initiation prior to intervention was lower), with no reductions but also no improvement in longer‐term retention and viral suppression. This may be due to lack of fidelity to implementation and delivery of those components that support retention and adherence. FTIC must continue to be implemented alongside other interventions to achieve the 90‐90‐90 cascade and fidelity to post‐initiation counselling sessions must be monitored to determine impact on longer‐term outcomes. Understanding the cost‐benefit and role of FTIC may then be warranted.