Suubi+Adherence-Round 2: A study protocol to examine the longitudinal HIV treatment adherence among youth living with HIV transitioning into young adulthood in Southern Uganda
Abstract:Background
Youth living with HIV (YLHIV) in Sub-Saharan African (SSA) are less likely to adhere to antiretroviral therapy (ART) and other health-related regimens. As a consequence, YLHIV are not only at risk for health problems and mental health comorbidities, but are also at risk for cognitive deficits, including in areas of memory and executive functioning. The Suubi+Adherence study followed 702 adolescents (10-16 years of age) receiving bolstered standard of care and a family economic empowe… Show more
Introduction:Engagement with HIV care is a multi-dimensional, dynamic process, critical to maintaining successful treatment outcomes. However, measures of engagement are not standardized nor comprehensive. This undermines our understanding of the scope of challenges with engagement and whether interventions have an impact, complicating patient and programmelevel decision-making. This study identified and characterized measures of engagement to support more consistent and comprehensive evaluation. Methods: We conducted a scoping study to systematically categorize measures the health system could use to evaluate engagement with HIV care for those on antiretroviral treatment. Key terms were used to search literature databases (Embase, PsychINFO, Ovid Global-Health, PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL, Cochrane and the World Health Organization Index Medicus), Google Scholar and stakeholder-identified manuscripts, ultimately including English evidence published from sub-Saharan Africa from 2014 to 2021. Measures were extracted, organized, then reviewed with key stakeholders. Results and discussion: We screened 14,885 titles/abstracts, included 118 full-texts and identified 110 measures of engagement, categorized into three engagement dimensions ("retention," "adherence" and "active self-management"), a combination category ("multi-dimensional engagement") and "treatment outcomes" category (e.g. viral load as an end-result reflecting that engagement occurred). Retention reflected status in care, continuity of attendance and visit timing. Adherence was assessed by a variety of measures categorized into primary (prescription not filled) and secondary measures (medication not taken as directed). Active self-management reflected involvement in care and self-management. Three overarching use cases were identified: research to make recommendations, routine monitoring for quality improvement and strategic decision-making and assessment of individual patients. Conclusions: Heterogeneity in conceptualizing engagement with HIV care is reflected by the broad range of measures identified and the lack of consensus on "gold-standard" indicators. This review organized metrics into five categories based on the dimensions of engagement; further work could identify a standardized, minimum set of measures useful for comprehensive evaluation of engagement for different use cases. In the interim, measurement of engagement could be advanced through the assessment of multiple categories for a more thorough evaluation, conducting sensitivity analyses with commonly used measures for more comparable outputs and using longitudinal measures to evaluate engagement patterns. This could improve research, programme evaluation and nuanced assessment of individual patient engagement in HIV care.
Introduction:Engagement with HIV care is a multi-dimensional, dynamic process, critical to maintaining successful treatment outcomes. However, measures of engagement are not standardized nor comprehensive. This undermines our understanding of the scope of challenges with engagement and whether interventions have an impact, complicating patient and programmelevel decision-making. This study identified and characterized measures of engagement to support more consistent and comprehensive evaluation. Methods: We conducted a scoping study to systematically categorize measures the health system could use to evaluate engagement with HIV care for those on antiretroviral treatment. Key terms were used to search literature databases (Embase, PsychINFO, Ovid Global-Health, PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL, Cochrane and the World Health Organization Index Medicus), Google Scholar and stakeholder-identified manuscripts, ultimately including English evidence published from sub-Saharan Africa from 2014 to 2021. Measures were extracted, organized, then reviewed with key stakeholders. Results and discussion: We screened 14,885 titles/abstracts, included 118 full-texts and identified 110 measures of engagement, categorized into three engagement dimensions ("retention," "adherence" and "active self-management"), a combination category ("multi-dimensional engagement") and "treatment outcomes" category (e.g. viral load as an end-result reflecting that engagement occurred). Retention reflected status in care, continuity of attendance and visit timing. Adherence was assessed by a variety of measures categorized into primary (prescription not filled) and secondary measures (medication not taken as directed). Active self-management reflected involvement in care and self-management. Three overarching use cases were identified: research to make recommendations, routine monitoring for quality improvement and strategic decision-making and assessment of individual patients. Conclusions: Heterogeneity in conceptualizing engagement with HIV care is reflected by the broad range of measures identified and the lack of consensus on "gold-standard" indicators. This review organized metrics into five categories based on the dimensions of engagement; further work could identify a standardized, minimum set of measures useful for comprehensive evaluation of engagement for different use cases. In the interim, measurement of engagement could be advanced through the assessment of multiple categories for a more thorough evaluation, conducting sensitivity analyses with commonly used measures for more comparable outputs and using longitudinal measures to evaluate engagement patterns. This could improve research, programme evaluation and nuanced assessment of individual patient engagement in HIV care.
“…However, several factors should be considered when defining actionable results, especially among people suffering a chronic illness like HIV/AIDS in low-resource settings. For example, for several decades, many PLHIV have been accessing antiretroviral treatment cheaply or freely from the Government of Uganda (Commission UACJKUA, 2015; Spacek et al, 2006; Ssewamala et al, 2023). The introduction of pharmacogenomic research aimed at optimizing HIV treatment may present information about approved and efficacious antiretroviral drugs with minimal adverse drug reactions tailored to an individual’s genetic makeup.…”
This study aimed to explore stakeholders’ perspectives on the ethical considerations for returning individual pharmacogenomics research results to people living with HIV. A qualitative approach to investigation involved five focus group discussions with 30 Community representatives, 12 key informant interviews with researchers, and 12 in-depth interviews with research ethics committee members. In total, 54 stakeholders who were involved in pharmacogenomics research and HIV treatment and care contributed to the data collection between September 2021 and February 2022. The study explored five prominent themes: (i) defining the nature of research results to return to participants; (ii) preparing research participants to receive their results; (iii) obtaining informed consent for the return of results; (iv) opinions on health personnel to return the results to participants; and (v) opinions on how research results should be communicated to participants. Respondents identified various strategies for the return of individual results with minimal ethical risks including the setting up of a diverse and independent committee to undertake a risk-benefit assessment based on local context; ongoing discussions about the possible kinds of results and their implications throughout the study; and employing genetic counsellors to communicate results to participants. The strategies identified in this study should be further studied and independently verified.
“…Survey assessments will occur at baseline, 6-, 12-, 24-, and 36-months, and all assessments will take place in ICHAD’s private research field offices in Masaka; at satellite sites (MildMay, RTY- Uganda); or at the participants’ homes (if they request it and there is sufficient privacy to ensure confidentiality, or at clinics (in a private room) with each lasting about 60 min [ 105 ]. Flexibility in interview location has been critical to Suubi + Adherence and other ICHAD studies success to date, with approximately 40% conducted in research offices in Masaka, and 50% in satellite sites [ 105 ]. Assessments are administered orally however for questions measuring sensitive behaviors, computer assisted self-interviews will be administered [ 106 ].…”
Background
Suubi is an evidenced based multi-component intervention that targets psychosocial and economic hardships to improve ART adherence, viral suppression, mental health, family financial stability, and family cohesion for adolescents living with HIV (ALHIV) in Uganda. Suubi was originally tested as a combined package of four components: 1) Financial Literacy Training; 2) incentivized matched Youth Savings Accounts with income-generating activities; 3) a manualized and visual-based intervention for ART adherence and stigma reduction; and 4) engagement with HIV treatment-experienced role models. However, it is unknown if each component in Suubi had a positive effect, how the components interacted, or if fewer components could have produced equivalent effects. Hence, the overall goal of this new study is to identify the most impactful and sustainable economic and psychosocial components across 48 health clinics in Uganda.
Methods
A total of 576 ALHIV (aged 11–17 years at enrollment) will be recruited from 48 clinics and each clinic will be randomized to one of 16 study conditions. Each condition represents every possible combination of the 4 components noted above. Assessments will be conducted at baseline, 12, 24, 36 and 48- months post-intervention initiation. Using the multi-phase optimization strategy (MOST), we will identify the optimal combination of components and associated costs for viral suppression, as well as test key mediators and moderators of the component-viral suppression relationship.
Discussion
The study is a shift in the paradigm of research to use new thinking to build/un-pack highly efficacious interventions that lead to new scientific knowledge in terms of understanding what drives an intervention’s success and how to iterate on them in ways that are more efficient, affordable and scalable. The study advances intervention science for HIV care outcomes globally.
Trial Registration
This project was registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT05600621) on October, 31, 2022. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05600621
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.