Biomarkers in Immune Reconstitution Inflammatory Syndrome (IRIS) among People Living with Human Immunodeficiency Virus/Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome (HIV/AIDS)

Mishra, Sudhish; Khadka, Sundar; Dhital, Subhash; Mahto, Raj Kumar; Manandhar, Krishna Das

doi:10.4172/2155-6113.1000728

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 26 publications

(48 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…From this response, the result may be detected (viral load result greater than or equal to 1000 cell/mm3) and undetected (viral load result which is less than 1000 cell/mm3) are classified under viral load test result of the HIV-infected patients. 15 Thus, the response variable under study was dichotomous in nature and denoted as;…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Predictors of Viral Load Status Over Time Among HIV Infected Adults Under HAART in Zewditu Memorial Hospital, Ethiopia: A Retrospective Study

Gwadu¹,

Tegegne²,

Mihretu³

et al. 2023

HIV

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background HIV attacks the CD4 cells which are responsible for the body’s immune response to infectious agents. The main objective of this study was to identify predictors of viral load status over time among HIV patients under HAART in Zewditu Memorial Hospital. Methods A retrospective institutional-based cohort study design was conducted on 161 HIV-infected adults under HAART whose follow-ups were from January 2014 up to December 2017. A generalized linear mixed-effects model was conducted to infer predictors of the status of viral load at 95% of CI). Results The descriptive statistics revealed that about 55.9% of the adults under treatment had a detected viral load status. Among the potential predictors, visiting time of patients (AOR = 0.731, 95%: (0.634,0.842) and p-value <0.01), age of patients (AOR = 1.0666, 95% CI: (1.0527,1.0917) and p-value <0.01), weight (AOR=. 0.904, 95% CI: (0.862, 0.946) and p-value <0.01), baseline CD4 cell count (AOR = 0.996, 95% CI: (0.994, 0.998) and P-value <0.01), educated patients (AOR = 0.030, 95% CI: (0.002, 0.385) and p-value=0.0053), rural patients (AOR = 6.30,95% CL: (1.78, 2.25) and p-value=0.0043), working status patients (AOR = 0.5905, 95% CI: (0.547,0.638), p-value <0.01), poor adherent patients (AOR = 1.120, 95% CI; (1.035,1.391) and p-value = 0.016) and patients disclosed the disease status (AOR = 0.195, 95% CI: (0.023, 0.818) and p-value=0.0134) significantly affected the detection status of viral loads, keeping all other covariates constant. Conclusion The predictor variables; visiting times, the weight of patients, residence area, age of patients, educational level, clinical stages, functional status, baseline CD4 cell count, adherence status, and disclosure status of the disease statistically and significantly affected the status of viral load. Hence, health-related education should be given for patients to disclose their disease status, to be good adherents based on the prescription given to the health staff. Due attentions should be given for rural and uneducated patients. Attention should be forwarded to for non-adherent patients to follow the instruction given by the health staff.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%