In: Bulletin of the World Health Organization: the international journal of public health = Bulletin de l'Organisation Mondiale de la Santé, Volume 92, Issue 9, p. 680-684
BackgroundA low body mass index (BMI) at antiretroviral therapy (ART) initiation is a strong predictor of mortality among HIV‐infected adults in resource‐constrained settings. The relationship between nutrition and inflammation‐related serum biomarkers and early treatment outcomes (e.g., less than 90 days) in this population is not well described.MethodsAn observational cohort of 142 HIV‐infected adults in Lusaka, Zambia, with BMI under 16 kg/m2or CD4+lymphocyte counts of less than 50 cells/mm3, or both, was followed prospectively during the first 12 weeks of ART. Baseline and serial post‐treatment phosphate, albumin, ferritin and highly sensitive C‐reactive protein (hsCRP) serum levels were measured. The primary outcome was mortality.ResultsLower baseline phosphate and albumin serum levels, and higher ferritin and hsCRP, were significantly associated with mortality prior to 12 weeks (p < 0.05 for all comparisons), independent of known risk factors for early ART‐associated mortality in sub‐Saharan Africa. The time‐dependent interval change in albumin was associated with mortality after adjusting for the baseline value (AHR 0.62 [0.43, 0.89] per 5 g/L increase), but changes in the other biomarkers were not.ConclusionsThe predictive value of serum biomarkers for early mortality in a cohort of adults with malnutrition and advanced HIV in a resource‐constrained setting was primarily driven by pre‐treatment values, rather than post‐ART changes. Interventions to promote earlier HIV diagnosis and treatment, address nutritional deficiencies, and identify the etiologies of increased systemic inflammation may improve ART outcomes in this vulnerable population.
AbstractIntroductionIntegration of services to screen and manage mental health and substance use disorders (MSDs) into HIV care settings has been identified as a promising strategy to improve mental health and HIV treatment outcomes among people living with HIV/AIDS (PLWHA) in low‐ and middle‐income countries (LMICs). Data on the extent to which HIV treatment sites in LMICs screen and manage MSDs are limited. The objective of this study was to assess practices for screening and treatment of MSDs at HIV clinics in LMICs participating in the International epidemiology Databases to Evaluate AIDS (IeDEA) consortium.MethodsWe surveyed a stratified random sample of 95 HIV clinics in 29 LMICs in the Caribbean, Central and South America, Asia‐Pacific and sub‐Saharan Africa. The survey captured information onsite characteristics and screening and treatment practices for depression, post‐traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), substance use disorders (SUDs) and other mental health disorders.ResultsMost sites (n = 76, 80%) were in urban areas. Mental health screening varied by disorder: 57% of sites surveyed screened for depression, 19% for PTSD, 55% for SUDs and 29% for other mental health disorders. Depression, PTSD, SUDs and other mental health disorders were reported as managed on site (having services provided at the HIV clinic or same health facility) at 70%, 51%, 41% and 47% of sites respectively. Combined availability of screening and on‐site management of depression, PTSD, and SUDs, and other mental health disorders was reported by 42%, 14%, 26% and 19% of sites, respectively. On‐site management of depression and PTSD was reported significantly less often in rural as compared to urban settings (depression: 33% and 78% respectively; PTSD: 24% and 58% respectively). Screening for depression and SUDs was least commonly reported by HIV programmes that treated only children as compared to HIV programmes that treated only adults or treated both adults and children.ConclusionsSignificant gaps exist in the management of MSDs in HIV care settings in LMICs, particularly in rural settings. Identification and evaluation of optimal implementation strategies to scale and sustain integrated MSDs and HIV care is needed.
AbstractIntroductionMentor Mothers (MM) provide peer support to pregnant and postpartum women living with HIV (PPWH) and their infants with perinatal HIV exposure (IPE) throughout the cascade of prevention of vertical transmission (PVT) services. MM were implemented in Zambézia Province, Mozambique starting in August 2017. This evaluation aimed to determine the effect of MM on PVT outcomes.MethodsA retrospective interrupted time series analysis was done using routinely collected aggregate data from 85 public health facilities providing HIV services in nine districts of Zambézia. All PPWH (and their IPE) who initiated antiretroviral therapy (ART) from August 2016 through April 2019 were included. Outcomes included the proportion per month per district of: PPWH retained in care 12 months after ART initiation, PPWH with viral suppression and IPE with HIV DNA PCR test positivity by 9 months of age. The effect of MM on outcomes was assessed using logistic regression.ResultsThe odds of 12‐month retention increased 1.5% per month in the pre‐MM period, compared to a monthly increase of 7.6% with‐MM (35–61% pre‐MM, 56–72% with‐MM; p < 0.001). The odds of being virally suppressed decreased by 0.9% per month in the pre‐MM period, compared to a monthly increase of 3.9% with‐MM (49–85% pre‐MM, 59–80% with‐MM; p < 0.001). The odds of DNA PCR positivity by 9 months of age decreased 8.9% per month in the pre‐MM period, compared to a monthly decrease of 0.4% with‐MM (0–14% pre‐MM, 4–10% with‐MM; p < 0.001). The odds of DNA PCR uptake (the proportion of IPE who received DNA PCR testing) by 9 months of age were significantly higher in the with‐MM period compared to the pre‐MM period (48–100% pre‐MM, 87–100% with‐MM; p < 0.001).ConclusionsMM services were associated with improved retention in PVT services and higher viral suppression rates among PPWH. While there was ongoing but diminishing improvement in DNA PCR positivity rates among IPE following MM implementation, this might be explained by increased uptake of HIV testing among high‐risk IPE who were previously not getting tested. Additional efforts are needed to further optimize PVT outcomes, and MM should be one part of a comprehensive strategy to address this critical need.
AbstractIntroductionSince 2015, the World Health Organization (WHO) has recommended that all people living with HIV (PLHIV) initiate antiretroviral treatment (ART), irrespective of CD4+ count or clinical stage. National adoption of universal treatment has accelerated since WHO's 2015 "Treat All" recommendation; however, little is known about the translation of this guidance into practice. This study aimed to assess the status of Treat All implementation across regions, countries, and levels of the health care delivery system.MethodsBetween June and December 2017, 201/221 (91%) adult HIV treatment sites that participate in the global IeDEA research consortium completed a survey on capacity and practices related to HIV care. Located in 41 countries across seven geographic regions, sites provided information on the status and timing of site‐level introduction of Treat All, as well as site‐level practices related to ART initiation.ResultsAlmost all sites (93%) reported that they had begun implementing Treat All, and there were no statistically significant differences in site‐level Treat All introduction by health facility type, urban/rural location, sector (public/private) or country income level. The median time between national policy adoption and site‐level introduction was one month. In countries where Treat All was not yet adopted in national guidelines, 69% of sites reported initiating all patients on ART, regardless of clinical criteria, and these sites had been implementing Treat All for a median period of seven months at the time of the survey. The majority of sites (77%) reported typically initiating patients on ART within 14 days of confirming diagnosis, with 60% to 62% of sites implementing Treat All in East, Southern and West Africa reporting same‐day ART initiation for most patients.ConclusionsBy mid‐ to late‐2017, the Treat All strategy was the standard of care at almost all IeDEA sites, including rural, primary‐level health facilities in low‐resource settings. While further assessments of site‐level capacity to provide high‐quality HIV care under Treat All and to support sustained viral suppression after ART initiation are needed, the widespread introduction of Treat All at the service delivery level is a critical step towards global targets for ending the HIV epidemic as a public health threat.
IntroductionHIV care and treatment programmes worldwide are transforming as they push to deliver universal access to essential prevention, care and treatment services to persons living with HIV and their communities. The characteristics and capacity of these HIV programmes affect patient outcomes and quality of care. Despite the importance of ensuring optimal outcomes, few studies have addressed the capacity of HIV programmes to deliver comprehensive care. We sought to describe such capacity in HIV programmes in seven regions worldwide.MethodsStaff from 128 sites in 41 countries participating in the International epidemiologic Databases to Evaluate AIDS completed a site survey from 2009 to 2010, including sites in the Asia‐Pacific region (n=20), Latin America and the Caribbean (n=7), North America (n=7), Central Africa (n=12), East Africa (n=51), Southern Africa (n=16) and West Africa (n=15). We computed a measure of the comprehensiveness of care based on seven World Health Organization‐recommended essential HIV services.ResultsMost sites reported serving urban (61%; region range (rr): 33–100%) and both adult and paediatric populations (77%; rr: 29–96%). Only 45% of HIV clinics that reported treating children had paediatricians on staff. As for the seven essential services, survey respondents reported that CD4+ cell count testing was available to all but one site, while tuberculosis (TB) screening and community outreach services were available in 80 and 72%, respectively. The remaining four essential services – nutritional support (82%), combination antiretroviral therapy adherence support (88%), prevention of mother‐to‐child transmission (PMTCT) (94%) and other prevention and clinical management services (97%) – were uniformly available. Approximately half (46%) of sites reported offering all seven services. Newer sites and sites in settings with low rankings on the UN Human Development Index (HDI), especially those in the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief focus countries, tended to offer a more comprehensive array of essential services. HIV care programme characteristics and comprehensiveness varied according to the number of years the site had been in operation and the HDI of the site setting, with more recently established clinics in low‐HDI settings reporting a more comprehensive array of available services. Survey respondents frequently identified contact tracing of patients, patient outreach, nutritional counselling, onsite viral load testing, universal TB screening and the provision of isoniazid preventive therapy as unavailable services.ConclusionsThis study serves as a baseline for on‐going monitoring of the evolution of care delivery over time and lays the groundwork for evaluating HIV treatment outcomes in relation to site capacity for comprehensive care.
AbstractIntroductionCommon mental disorders (CMDs) are highly prevalent among people with HIV. Integrating mental healthcare into HIV care may improve mental health and HIV treatment outcomes. We describe the reported availability of screening and treatment for depression, anxiety and post‐traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) at global HIV treatment centres participating in the International epidemiology Databases to Evaluate AIDS (IeDEA) Consortium in 2020 and changes in availability at sites in low‐ or middle‐income countries (LMICs) between 2016/2017 and 2020.MethodsIn 2020, 238 sites contributing individual‐level data to the IeDEA Consortium and in 2016/2017 a stratified random sample of IeDEA sites in LMICs were eligible to participate in site surveys on the availability of screening and treatment for CMDs. We assessed trends over time for 68 sites across 27 LMICs that participated in both surveys.ResultsAmong the 238 sites eligible to participate in the 2020 site survey, 227 (95%) participated, and mental health screening and treatment data were available for 223 (98%) sites across 41 countries. A total of 95 sites across 29 LMICs completed the 2016/2017 survey. In 2020, 68% of sites were in urban settings, and 77% were in LMICs. Overall, 50%, 14% and 12% of sites reported screening with a validated instrument for depression, anxiety and PTSD, respectively. Screening plus treatment in the form of counselling was available for depression, anxiety and PTSD at 46%, 13% and 11% of sites, respectively. Screening plus treatment in the form of medication was available for depression, anxiety and PTSD at 36%, 11% and 8% of sites, respectively. Among sites that participated in both surveys, screening for depression was more commonly available in 2020 than 2016/2017 (75% vs. 59%, respectively, p = 0.048).ConclusionsReported availability of screening for depression increased among this group of IeDEA sites in LMICs between 2016/2017 and 2020. However, substantial gaps persist in the availability of mental healthcare at HIV treatment sites across global settings, particularly in resource‐constrained settings. Implementation of sustainable strategies to integrate mental health services into HIV care is needed.
ABSTRACTIntroduction: An important determinant of the effectiveness of HIV treatment programs is the capacity of sites to implement recommended services and identify systematic changes needed to ensure that invested resources translate into improved patient outcomes. We conducted a survey in 2014 of HIV care and treatment sites in the seven regions of the International epidemiologic Database to Evaluate AIDS (IeDEA) Consortium to evaluate facility characteristics, HIV prevention, care and treatment services provided, laboratory capacity, and trends in the comprehensiveness of care compared to data obtained in the 2009 baseline survey.Methods: Clinical staff from 262 treatment sites in 45 countries in IeDEA completed a site survey from September 2014 to January 2015, including Asia‐Pacific with Australia (n = 50), Latin America and the Caribbean (n = 11), North America (n = 45), Central Africa (n = 17), East Africa (n = 36), Southern Africa (n = 87), and West Africa (n = 16). For the 55 sites with complete data from both the 2009 and 2014 survey, we evaluated change in comprehensiveness of care.Results: The majority of the 262 sites (61%) offered seven essential services (ART adherence, nutritional support, PMTCT, CD4+ cell count testing, tuberculosis screening, HIV prevention, and outreach). Sites that were publicly funded (64%), cared for adults and children (68%), low or middle Human Development Index (HDI) rank (68%, 68%), and received PEPFAR support (71%) were most often fully comprehensive. CD4+ cell count testing was universally available (98%) but only 62% of clinics offered it onsite. Approximately two‐thirds (69%) of sites reported routine viral load testing (44–100%), with 39% having it onsite. Laboratory capacity to monitor antiretroviral‐related toxicity and diagnose opportunistic infections varied widely by testing modality and region. In the subgroup of 55 sites with two surveys, comprehensiveness of services provided significantly increased across all regions from 2009 to 2014 (5.7 to 6.5, p < 0.001).Conclusions: The availability of viral load monitoring remains suboptimal and should be a focus for site capacity, particularly in East and Southern Africa, where the majority of those initiating on ART reside. However, the comprehensiveness of care provided increased over the past 5 years and was related to type of funding received (publicly funded and PEPFAR supported).
AbstractIntroductionInterruptions in treatment pose risks for people with HIV (PWH) and threaten progress in ending the HIV epidemic; however, the COVID‐19 pandemic's impact on HIV service delivery across diverse settings is not broadly documented.MethodsFrom September 2020 to March 2021, the International epidemiology Databases to Evaluate AIDS (IeDEA) research consortium surveyed 238 HIV care sites across seven geographic regions to document constraints in HIV service delivery during the first year of the pandemic and strategies for ensuring care continuity for PWH. Descriptive statistics were stratified by national HIV prevalence (<1%, 1–4.9% and ≥5%) and country income levels.ResultsQuestions about pandemic‐related consequences for HIV care were completed by 225 (95%) sites in 42 countries with low (n= 82), medium (n= 86) and high (n= 57) HIV prevalence, including low‐ (n= 57), lower‐middle (n= 79), upper‐middle (n= 39) and high‐ (n= 50) income countries. Most sites reported being subject to pandemic‐related restrictions on travel, service provision or other operations (75%), and experiencing negative impacts (76%) on clinic operations, including decreased hours/days, reduced provider availability, clinic reconfiguration for COVID‐19 services, record‐keeping interruptions and suspension of partner support. Almost all sites in low‐prevalence and high‐income countries reported increased use of telemedicine (85% and 100%, respectively), compared with less than half of sites in high‐prevalence and lower‐income settings. Few sites in high‐prevalence settings (2%) reported suspending antiretroviral therapy (ART) clinic services, and many reported adopting mitigation strategies to support adherence, including multi‐month dispensing of ART (95%) and designating community ART pick‐up points (44%). While few sites (5%) reported stockouts of first‐line ART regimens, 10–11% reported stockouts of second‐ and third‐line regimens, respectively, primarily in high‐prevalence and lower‐income settings. Interruptions in HIV viral load (VL) testing included suspension of testing (22%), longer turnaround times (41%) and supply/reagent stockouts (22%), but did not differ across settings.ConclusionsWhile many sites in high HIV prevalence settings and lower‐income countries reported introducing or expanding measures to support treatment adherence and continuity of care, the COVID‐19 pandemic resulted in disruptions to VL testing and ART supply chains that may negatively affect the quality of HIV care in these settings.