Suchergebnisse

We examined methodological issues in studies of disaster-related effects on reproductive health outcomes and fertility among women of reproductive age and infants in the United States (US). We conducted a systematic literature review of 1,635 articles and reports published in peer-reviewed journals or by the government from January 1981 through December 2010. We classified the studies using three exposure types: (1) physical exposure to toxicants; (2) psychological trauma; and (3) general exposure to disaster. Fifteen articles met our inclusion criteria concerning research focus and design. Overall studies pertained to eight different disasters, with most (n = 6) focused on the World Trade Center attack. Only one study examined pregnancy loss, i.e., occurrence of spontaneous abortions post-disaster. Most studies focused on associations between disaster and adverse birth outcomes, but two studies pertained only to post-disaster fertility while another two examined it in addition to adverse birth outcomes. In most studies disaster-affected populations were assumed to have experienced psychological trauma, but exposure to trauma was measured in only four studies. Furthermore, effects of both physical exposure to toxicants and psychological trauma on disaster-affected populations were examined in only one study. Effects on birth outcomes were not consistently demonstrated, and study methodologies varied widely. Even so, these studies suggest an association between disasters and reproductive health and highlight the need for further studies to clarify associations. We postulate that post-disaster surveillance among pregnant women could improve our understanding of effects of disaster on the reproductive health of US pregnant women.

AbstractIntroductionThe PROMISE study was launched in 2018 to assess and document the implementation of changes to an existing HIV Care Coordination Programme (CCP) designed to address persistent disparities in care and treatment engagement among persons with HIV in New York City. We evaluated provider endorsement of features of the CCP to understand drivers of engagement with the programme.MethodsWe used a discrete choice experiment to measure provider endorsement of four CCP attributes, including: (1) how CCP helps with medication adherence, (2) how CCP helps with primary care appointments, (3) how CCP helps with issues other than primary care and (4) where CCP visits take place (visit location). Each attribute had three to four levels. Our primary outcomes were relative importance and part‐worth utilities, measures of preference for the levels of the four CCP program attributes, estimated using a hierarchical‐Bayesian multinomial logit model. All non‐medical providers in the core CCP positions of patient navigator, care coordinator and programme director or other administrator from each of the 25 revised CCP‐implementing agencies were eligible to participate.ResultsWe received responses from 152 providers, 68% of whom identified as women, 49% identified as Latino/a, 34% identified as Black and 60% were 30–49 years old. Visit location (28.6%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 27.0–30.3%) had the highest relative importance, followed by how staff help with ART adherence (24.3%, 95% CI 22.4–26.1%), how staff help with issues other than primary care (24.2%, 95% CI 22.7–25.7%) and how staff help with primary care appointments (22.9%, 95% CI 21.7–24.1%). Within each of the above attributes, respectively, the levels with the highest part‐worth utilities were home visits 60 minutes from the program or agency (utility 19.9, 95% CI 10.7–29.0), directly observed therapy (utility 26.1, 95% CI 19.1–33.1), help with non‐HIV specialty medical care (utility 26.5, 95% CI 21.5–31.6) and reminding clients about and accompanying them to primary care appointments (utility 20.8, 95% CI 15.6–26.0).ConclusionsOngoing CCP refinements should account for how best to support and evaluate the intensive CCP components endorsed by providers in this study.

AbstractIntroductionThe PROMISE study, launched in 2018, evaluates the implementation of revisions to the HIV Care Coordination Program (CCP) designed to minimize persistent disparities in HIV outcomes among high‐need persons living with HIV in New York City. We conducted a discrete choice experiment (DCE) assessing the preferences of CCP clients to inform improvements to the program's design.MethodsClients chose between two hypothetical CCP options that varied across four program attributes: help with antiretroviral therapy (ART) adherence (directly observed therapy [DOT] vs. remind via phone/text vs. adherence assessment), help with primary care appointments (remind and accompany vs. remind and transport vs. remind only), help with issues other than primary care (coverage and benefits vs. housing and food vs. mental health vs. specialty medical care) and visit location (meet at home vs. via phone/video vs. program visit 30 or 60 minutes away). The latent class analysis identified different preference patterns. A choice simulation was performed to model client preferences for hypothetical CCPs as a whole.ResultsOne hundred and eighty‐one CCP clients from six sites implementing the revised CCP completed the DCE January 2020–March 2021. Most clients had stable housing (68.5%), reported no problem substance use in the last 3 months (72.4%) and achieved viral suppression (78.5) with only 26.5% receiving DOT within a CCP. 77.3% of responses were obtained before the COVID‐19 pandemic. Preferences clustered into three groups. Visit location and ART adherence support were the most important attributes. Group 1 (40%) endorsed telehealth for visit location; telehealth for ART adherence support; and help with securing housing/food; Group 2 (37%) endorsed telehealth for visit location; telehealth for ART adherence support; and staff reminding/arranging appointment transportation; Group 3 (23%) endorsed staff meeting clients at program location and staff working with clients for medication adherence. In the choice simulation, Basic and Medium hypothetical CCPs were endorsed more than Intensive CCPs.ConclusionsThis DCE revealed a strong preference for telehealth and a relatively low preference for intensive services, such as DOT and home visits; preferences were heterogeneous. The findings support differentiated care and remote service delivery options in the NYC CCP, and can inform improvements to CCP design.