Search

BackgroundPregnant and postpartum women in Sub-Saharan Africa are at high risk of HIV acquisition. We evaluated a person-centered dynamic choice intervention for HIV prevention (DCP) among women attending antenatal and postnatal care.SettingRural Kenya and Uganda.MethodsWomen (aged 15 years or older) at risk of HIV acquisition seen at antenatal and postnatal care clinics were individually randomized to DCP vs. standard of care (SEARCH; NCT04810650). The DCP intervention included structured client choice of product (daily oral pre-exposure prophylaxis or postexposure prophylaxis), service location (clinic or out of facility), and HIV testing modality (self-test or provider-administered), with option to switch over time and person-centered care (phone access to clinician, structured barrier assessment and counseling, and provider training). The primary outcome was biomedical prevention coverage-proportion of 48-week follow-up with self-reported pre-exposure prophylaxis or postexposure prophylaxis use, compared between arms using targeted maximum likelihood estimation.ResultsBetween April and July 2021, we enrolled 400 women (203 intervention and 197 control); 38% were pregnant, 52% were aged 15-24 years, and 94% reported no pre-exposure prophylaxis or postexposure prophylaxis use for ≥6 months before baseline. Among 384/400 participants (96%) with outcome ascertained, DCP increased biomedical prevention coverage 40% (95% CI: 34% to 47%; P < 0.001); the coverage was 70% in intervention vs. 29% in control. DCP also increased coverage during months at risk of HIV (81% in intervention, 43% in control; 38% absolute increase; 95% CI: 31% to 45%; P < 0.001).ConclusionA person-centered dynamic choice intervention that provided flexibility in product, testing, and service location more than doubled biomedical HIV prevention coverage in a high-risk population already routinely offered access to biomedical prevention options.

BackgroundUniversal antiretroviral therapy (ART) with annual population testing and a multidisease, patient-centered strategy could reduce new human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infections and improve community health.MethodsWe randomly assigned 32 rural communities in Uganda and Kenya to baseline HIV and multidisease testing and national guideline-restricted ART (control group) or to baseline testing plus annual testing, eligibility for universal ART, and patient-centered care (intervention group). The primary end point was the cumulative incidence of HIV infection at 3 years. Secondary end points included viral suppression, death, tuberculosis, hypertension control, and the change in the annual incidence of HIV infection (which was evaluated in the intervention group only).ResultsA total of 150,395 persons were included in the analyses. Population-level viral suppression among 15,399 HIV-infected persons was 42% at baseline and was higher in the intervention group than in the control group at 3 years (79% vs. 68%; relative prevalence, 1.15; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.11 to 1.20). The annual incidence of HIV infection in the intervention group decreased by 32% over 3 years (from 0.43 to 0.31 cases per 100 person-years; relative rate, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.56 to 0.84). However, the 3-year cumulative incidence (704 incident HIV infections) did not differ significantly between the intervention group and the control group (0.77% and 0.81%, respectively; relative risk, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.77 to 1.17). Among HIV-infected persons, the risk of death by year 3 was 3% in the intervention group and 4% in the control group (0.99 vs. 1.29 deaths per 100 person-years; relative risk, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.64 to 0.93). The risk of HIV-associated tuberculosis or death by year 3 among HIV-infected persons was 4% in the intervention group and 5% in the control group (1.19 vs. 1.50 events per 100 person-years; relative risk, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.67 to 0.94). At 3 years, 47% of adults with hypertensio

BackgroundAlthough patient attrition is recognized as a threat to the long-term success of antiretroviral therapy programs worldwide, there is no universal definition for classifying patients as lost to follow-up (LTFU). We analyzed data from health facilities across Africa, Asia, and Latin America to empirically determine a standard LTFU definition.Methods and findingsAt a set "status classification" date, patients were categorized as either "active" or "LTFU" according to different intervals from time of last clinic encounter. For each threshold, we looked forward 365 d to assess the performance and accuracy of this initial classification. The best-performing definition for LTFU had the lowest proportion of patients misclassified as active or LTFU. Observational data from 111 health facilities-representing 180,718 patients from 19 countries-were included in this study. In the primary analysis, for which data from all facilities were pooled, an interval of 180 d (95% confidence interval [CI]: 173-181 d) since last patient encounter resulted in the fewest misclassifications (7.7%, 95% CI: 7.6%-7.8%). A secondary analysis that gave equal weight to cohorts and to regions generated a similar result (175 d); however, an alternate approach that used inverse weighting for cohorts based on variance and equal weighting for regions produced a slightly lower summary measure (150 d). When examined at the facility level, the best-performing definition varied from 58 to 383 d (mean=150 d), but when a standard definition of 180 d was applied to each facility, only slight increases in misclassification (mean=1.2%, 95% CI: 1.0%-1.5%) were observed. Using this definition, the proportion of patients classified as LTFU by facility ranged from 3.1% to 45.1% (mean=19.9%, 95% CI: 19.1%-21.7%).ConclusionsBased on this evaluation, we recommend the adoption of ≥180 d since the last clinic visit as a standard LTFU definition. Such standardization is an important step to understanding the rea

BackgroundAlthough patient attrition is recognized as a threat to the long-term success of antiretroviral therapy programs worldwide, there is no universal definition for classifying patients as lost to follow-up (LTFU). We analyzed data from health facilities across Africa, Asia, and Latin America to empirically determine a standard LTFU definition.Methods and findingsAt a set "status classification" date, patients were categorized as either "active" or "LTFU" according to different intervals from time of last clinic encounter. For each threshold, we looked forward 365 d to assess the performance and accuracy of this initial classification. The best-performing definition for LTFU had the lowest proportion of patients misclassified as active or LTFU. Observational data from 111 health facilities-representing 180,718 patients from 19 countries-were included in this study. In the primary analysis, for which data from all facilities were pooled, an interval of 180 d (95% confidence interval [CI]: 173-181 d) since last patient encounter resulted in the fewest misclassifications (7.7%, 95% CI: 7.6%-7.8%). A secondary analysis that gave equal weight to cohorts and to regions generated a similar result (175 d); however, an alternate approach that used inverse weighting for cohorts based on variance and equal weighting for regions produced a slightly lower summary measure (150 d). When examined at the facility level, the best-performing definition varied from 58 to 383 d (mean=150 d), but when a standard definition of 180 d was applied to each facility, only slight increases in misclassification (mean=1.2%, 95% CI: 1.0%-1.5%) were observed. Using this definition, the proportion of patients classified as LTFU by facility ranged from 3.1% to 45.1% (mean=19.9%, 95% CI: 19.1%-21.7%).ConclusionsBased on this evaluation, we recommend the adoption of ≥180 d since the last clinic visit as a standard LTFU definition. Such standardization is an important step to understanding the rea