Assessing the performance of the EA process
In: Project appraisal: ways, means and experiences, Volume 9, Issue 3, p. 161-172
13 results
Sort by:
In: Project appraisal: ways, means and experiences, Volume 9, Issue 3, p. 161-172
In: Ecology and society: E&S ; a journal of integrative science for resilience and sustainability, Volume 18, Issue 3
ISSN: 1708-3087
In: Ecology and society: E&S ; a journal of integrative science for resilience and sustainability, Volume 16, Issue 2
ISSN: 1708-3087
In: STOTEN-D-22-17062
SSRN
In: Ecology and society: E&S ; a journal of integrative science for resilience and sustainability, Volume 18, Issue 2
ISSN: 1708-3087
In: Journal of the International AIDS Society, Volume 20, Issue S6
ISSN: 1758-2652
AbstractIntroduction: Rapid diagnostic testing has made HIV diagnosis and subsequent treatment more accessible. However, multiple factors, including improper implementation of testing strategies and clerical errors, have been reported to lead to HIV misdiagnosis. The World Health Organization has recommended HIV retesting prior to antiretroviral therapy (ART) initiation which has become pertinent with scaling up of Early Access to ART for All (EAAA). In this analysis, misdiagnosed clients are identified from a subgroup of clients enrolled in EAAA implementation study in Swaziland.Methods: The subgroup to assess misdiagnosis was identified from enrolled EAAA study clients, who had an undetectable viral load prior to ART initiation between September 1, 2014 and May 31, 2016. One hundred and five of 2533 (4%) clients had an undetectable viral load prior to initiation to ART (pre‐ART). The HIV status of clients was confirmed using the Determine HIV 1/2 and Uni‐Gold HIV 1/2 rapid tests performed serially as recommended by the national testing algorithm. The status of clients on ART was additionally confirmed by fourth‐generation HIV Ag/Ab combo tests, Architect and Genscreen Ultra.Results: Fourteen of the 105 (13%) clients were false positive (HIV negative) on confirmation testing, of whom five (36%) were still in pre‐ART care, while nine (64%) were in ART care. Overall, proportion of false positive was 0.6% (14/2533). The false‐positive clients had a median CD4 of 791 cells/ml (interquartile range (IQR): 628, 967) compared to 549 cells/ml (IQR: 387, 791) for true positives (HIV positive) (p = 0.0081) and were nearly 20 years older (p = 0.0008).Conclusions: Overall 0.6% of all enrolled EAAA clients were misdiagnosed, and 64% of misdiagnosed clients were initiated on ART. With adoption of EAAA guidelines by national governments, ART initiation regardless of immunological criteria, strengthening of proficiency testing and adoption of retesting prior to ART initiation would allow identification of misdiagnosed clients and further reduce potential of initiating misdiagnosed clients on ART.
In: Journal of the International AIDS Society, Volume 23, Issue 9
ISSN: 1758-2652
AbstractIntroductionThe WHO recommends antiretroviral treatment (ART) for all HIV‐positive patients regardless of CD4 count or disease stage, referred to as "Early Access to ART for All" (EAAA). The health systems effects of EAAA implementation are unknown. This trial was implemented in a government‐managed public health system with the aim to examine the "real world" impact of EAAA on care retention and viral suppression.MethodsIn this stepped‐wedge randomized controlled trial, 14 public sector health facilities in Eswatini were paired and randomly assigned to stepwise transition from standard of care (SoC) to EAAA. ART‐naïve participants ≥18 years who were not pregnant or breastfeeding were eligible for enrolment. We used Cox proportional hazard models with censoring at clinic transition to estimate the effects of EAAA on retention in care and retention and viral suppression combined.ResultsBetween September 2014 and August 2017, 3405 participants were enrolled. In SoC and EAAA respectively, 12‐month HIV care retention rates were 80% (95% CI: 77 to 83) and 86% (95% CI: 83 to 88). The 12‐month combined retention and viral suppression endpoint rates were 44% (95% CI: 40 to 48) under SoC compared to 80% (95% CI: 77 to 83) under EAAA. EAAA increased both retention (HR: 1·60, 95% CI: 1·15 to 2·21, p = 0.005) and retention and viral suppression combined (HR: 4.88, 95% CI: 2.96 to 8.05, p < 0.001). We also identified significant gaps in current health systems ability to provide viral load (VL) monitoring with 80% participants in SoC and 66% in EAAA having a missing VL at last contact.ConclusionsThe observed improvement in retention in care and on the combined retention and viral suppression provides an important co‐benefit of EAAA to HIV‐positive adults themselves, at least in the short term. Our results from this "real world" health systems trial strongly support EAAA for Eswatini and countries with similar HIV epidemics and health systems. VL monitoring needs to be scaled up for appropriate care management.
INTRODUCTION: The WHO recommends antiretroviral treatment (ART) for all HIV‐positive patients regardless of CD4 count or disease stage, referred to as "Early Access to ART for All" (EAAA). The health systems effects of EAAA implementation are unknown. This trial was implemented in a government‐managed public health system with the aim to examine the "real world" impact of EAAA on care retention and viral suppression. METHODS: In this stepped‐wedge randomized controlled trial, 14 public sector health facilities in Eswatini were paired and randomly assigned to stepwise transition from standard of care (SoC) to EAAA. ART‐naïve participants ≥18 years who were not pregnant or breastfeeding were eligible for enrolment. We used Cox proportional hazard models with censoring at clinic transition to estimate the effects of EAAA on retention in care and retention and viral suppression combined. RESULTS: Between September 2014 and August 2017, 3405 participants were enrolled. In SoC and EAAA respectively, 12‐month HIV care retention rates were 80% (95% CI: 77 to 83) and 86% (95% CI: 83 to 88). The 12‐month combined retention and viral suppression endpoint rates were 44% (95% CI: 40 to 48) under SoC compared to 80% (95% CI: 77 to 83) under EAAA. EAAA increased both retention (HR: 1·60, 95% CI: 1·15 to 2·21, p = 0.005) and retention and viral suppression combined (HR: 4.88, 95% CI: 2.96 to 8.05, p < 0.001). We also identified significant gaps in current health systems ability to provide viral load (VL) monitoring with 80% participants in SoC and 66% in EAAA having a missing VL at last contact. CONCLUSIONS: The observed improvement in retention in care and on the combined retention and viral suppression provides an important co‐benefit of EAAA to HIV‐positive adults themselves, at least in the short term. Our results from this "real world" health systems trial strongly support EAAA for Eswatini and countries with similar HIV epidemics and health systems. VL monitoring needs to be scaled up for appropriate care management.
BASE
In: Journal of the International AIDS Society, Volume 21, Issue 1
ISSN: 1758-2652
AbstractDesignUniversal voluntary HIV counselling and testing followed by prompt initiation of antiretroviral therapy (ART) for all those diagnosed HIV‐infected (universal test and treat, UTT) is now a global health standard. However, its population‐level impact, feasibility and cost remain unknown. Five community‐based trials have been implemented in sub‐Saharan Africa to measure the effects of various UTT strategies at population level: BCPP/YaTsie in Botswana, MaxART in Swaziland, HPTN 071 (PopART) in South Africa and Zambia, SEARCH in Uganda and Kenya and ANRS 12249 TasP in South Africa. This report describes and contrasts the contexts, research methodologies, intervention packages, themes explored, evolution of study designs and interventions related to each of these five UTT trials.MethodsWe conducted a comparative assessment of the five trials using data extracted from study protocols and collected during baseline studies, with additional input from study investigators. We organized differences and commonalities across the trials in five categories: trial contexts, research designs, intervention packages, trial themes and adaptations.ResultsAll performed in the context of generalized HIV epidemics, the trials highly differ in their social, demographic, economic, political and health systems settings. They share the common aim of assessing the impact of UTT on the HIV epidemic but differ in methodological aspects such as study design and eligibility criteria for trial populations. In addition to universal ART initiation, the trials deliver a wide range of biomedical, behavioural and structural interventions as part of their UTT strategies. The five studies explore common issues, including the uptake rates of the trial services and individual health outcomes. All trials have adapted since their initiation to the evolving political, economic and public health contexts, including adopting the successive national recommendations for ART initiation.ConclusionsWe found substantial commonalities but also differences between the five UTT trials in their design, conduct and multidisciplinary outputs. As empirical literature on how UTT may improve efficiency and quality of HIV care at population level is still scarce, this article provides a foundation for more collaborative research on UTT and supports evidence‐based decision making for HIV care in country and internationally.
DesignUniversal voluntary HIV counselling and testing followed by prompt initiation of antiretroviral therapy (ART) for all those diagnosed HIV-infected (universal test and treat, UTT) is now a global health standard. However, its population-level impact, feasibility and cost remain unknown. Five community-based trials have been implemented in sub-Saharan Africa to measure the effects of various UTT strategies at population level: BCPP/YaTsie in Botswana, MaxART in Swaziland, HPTN 071 (PopART) in South Africa and Zambia, SEARCH in Uganda and Kenya and ANRS 12249 TasP in South Africa. This report describes and contrasts the contexts, research methodologies, intervention packages, themes explored, evolution of study designs and interventions related to each of these five UTT trials.MethodsWe conducted a comparative assessment of the five trials using data extracted from study protocols and collected during baseline studies, with additional input from study investigators. We organized differences and commonalities across the trials in five categories: trial contexts, research designs, intervention packages, trial themes and adaptations.ResultsAll performed in the context of generalized HIV epidemics, the trials highly differ in their social, demographic, economic, political and health systems settings. They share the common aim of assessing the impact of UTT on the HIV epidemic but differ in methodological aspects such as study design and eligibility criteria for trial populations. In addition to universal ART initiation, the trials deliver a wide range of biomedical, behavioural and structural interventions as part of their UTT strategies. The five studies explore common issues, including the uptake rates of the trial services and individual health outcomes. All trials have adapted since their initiation to the evolving political, economic and public health contexts, including adopting the successive national recommendations for ART initiation.ConclusionsWe found substantial commonalities but also differences between the five UTT trials in their design, conduct and multidisciplinary outputs. As empirical literature on how UTT may improve efficiency and quality of HIV care at population level is still scarce, this article provides a foundation for more collaborative research on UTT and supports evidence-based decision making for HIV care in country and internationally.
BASE
Universal voluntary HIV counselling and testing followed by prompt initiation of antiretroviral therapy (ART) for all those diagnosed HIV-infected (universal test and treat, UTT) is now a global health standard. However, its population-level impact, feasibility and cost remain unknown. Five community-based trials have been implemented in sub-Saharan Africa to measure the effects of various UTT strategies at population level: BCPP/YaTsie in Botswana, MaxART in Swaziland, HPTN 071 (PopART) in South Africa and Zambia, SEARCH in Uganda and Kenya and ANRS 12249 TasP in South Africa. This report describes and contrasts the contexts, research methodologies, intervention packages, themes explored, evolution of study designs and interventions related to each of these five UTT trials. We conducted a comparative assessment of the five trials using data extracted from study protocols and collected during baseline studies, with additional input from study investigators. We organized differences and commonalities across the trials in five categories: trial contexts, research designs, intervention packages, trial themes and adaptations. All performed in the context of generalized HIV epidemics, the trials highly differ in their social, demographic, economic, political and health systems settings. They share the common aim of assessing the impact of UTT on the HIV epidemic but differ in methodological aspects such as study design and eligibility criteria for trial populations. In addition to universal ART initiation, the trials deliver a wide range of biomedical, behavioural and structural interventions as part of their UTT strategies. The five studies explore common issues, including the uptake rates of the trial services and individual health outcomes. All trials have adapted since their initiation to the evolving political, economic and public health contexts, including adopting the successive national recommendations for ART initiation. We found substantial commonalities but also differences between the five UTT trials in ...
BASE
DESIGN: Universal voluntary HIV counselling and testing followed by prompt initiation of antiretroviral therapy (ART) for all those diagnosed HIV-infected (universal test and treat, UTT) is now a global health standard. However, its population-level impact, feasibility and cost remain unknown. Five community-based trials have been implemented in sub-Saharan Africa to measure the effects of various UTT strategies at population level: BCPP/YaTsie in Botswana, MaxART in Swaziland, HPTN 071 (PopART) in South Africa and Zambia, SEARCH in Uganda and Kenya and ANRS 12249 TasP in South Africa. This report describes and contrasts the contexts, research methodologies, intervention packages, themes explored, evolution of study designs and interventions related to each of these five UTT trials. METHODS: We conducted a comparative assessment of the five trials using data extracted from study protocols and collected during baseline studies, with additional input from study investigators. We organized differences and commonalities across the trials in five categories: trial contexts, research designs, intervention packages, trial themes and adaptations. RESULTS: All performed in the context of generalized HIV epidemics, the trials highly differ in their social, demographic, economic, political and health systems settings. They share the common aim of assessing the impact of UTT on the HIV epidemic but differ in methodological aspects such as study design and eligibility criteria for trial populations. In addition to universal ART initiation, the trials deliver a wide range of biomedical, behavioural and structural interventions as part of their UTT strategies. The five studies explore common issues, including the uptake rates of the trial services and individual health outcomes. All trials have adapted since their initiation to the evolving political, economic and public health contexts, including adopting the successive national recommendations for ART initiation. CONCLUSIONS: We found substantial commonalities but also differences between the five UTT trials in their design, conduct and multidisciplinary outputs. As empirical literature on how UTT may improve efficiency and quality of HIV care at population level is still scarce, this article provides a foundation for more collaborative research on UTT and supports evidence-based decision making for HIV care in country and internationally.
BASE
A comprehensive monitoring of a broad set of antibiotics in the final effluent of wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs) of 7 European countries (Portugal, Spain, Ireland, Cyprus, Germany, Finland, and Norway) was carried out in two consecutive years (2015 and 2016). This is the first study of this kind performed at an international level. Within the 53 antibiotics monitored 17 were detected at least once in the final effluent of the WWTPs, i.e.: ciprofloxacin, ofloxacin, enrofloxacin, orbifloxacin, azithromycin, clarithromycin, sulfapyridine, sulfamethoxazole, trimethoprim, nalidixic acid, pipemidic acid, oxolinic acid, cefalexin, clindamycin, metronidazole, ampicillin, and tetracycline. The countries exhibiting the highest effluent average concentrations of antibiotics were Ireland and the southern countries Portugal and Spain, whereas the northern countries (Norway, Finland and Germany) and Cyprus exhibited lower total concentration. The antibiotic occurrence data in the final effluents were used for the assessment of their impact on the aquatic environment. Both, environmental predicted no effect concentration (PNEC-ENVs) and the PNECs based on minimal inhibitory concentrations (PNEC-MICs) were considered for the evaluation of the impact on microbial communities in aquatic systems and on the evolution of antibiotic resistance, respectively. Based on this analysis, three compounds, ciprofloxacin, azithromycin and cefalexin are proposed as markers of antibiotic pollution, as they could occasionally pose a risk to the environment. Integrated studies like this are crucial to map the impact of antibiotic pollution and to provide the basis for designing water quality and environmental risk in regular water monitoring programs ; Authors acknowledge the support from the Economy and Knowledge Department of the Catalan Government through Consolidated Research Group (ICRA-ENV 2017 SGR 1124 and 2017-SGR-1404-Water and Soil Quality Unit). S.R.-M. acknowledges the Ramon y Cajal program (RYC-2014-16707). I.V.-M. was supported ...
BASE