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.

BackgroundPersons with HIV (PWH) with high mobility face obstacles to HIV care engagement and viral suppression. We sought to understand whether a patient-centered intervention for mobile PWH would improve viral suppression and retention in care, and if so, which subgroups would benefit most.MethodsIn a randomized trial, we evaluated the effect of an intervention designed to address barriers to care among mobile (≥2 weeks out of community in previous year) PWH with viral nonsuppression or recent missed visits in Kenya and Uganda (NCT04810650). The intervention included dynamic choice of a "travel pack" (emergency antiretroviral therapy [ART] supply, discrete ART packaging, and travel checklist), multimonth and offsite refills, facilitated transfer to out-of-community clinics, and hotline access to a mobility coordinator. The primary outcome was viral suppression (

Background: Pregnant 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., Setting: Rural Kenya and Uganda., Methods: Women (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., Results: Between 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)., Conclusion: A 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., Competing Interests: C.A.K. has received grant support paid to the University of California, San Francisco from Gilead Sciences. The remaining authors have no funding or conflicts of interest to disclose., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)

Background: Persons with HIV (PWH) with high mobility face obstacles to HIV care engagement and viral suppression. We sought to understand whether a patient-centered intervention for mobile PWH would improve viral suppression and retention in care, and if so, which subgroups would benefit most., Methods: In a randomized trial, we evaluated the effect of an intervention designed to address barriers to care among mobile (≥2 weeks out of community in previous year) PWH with viral nonsuppression or recent missed visits in Kenya and Uganda (NCT04810650). The intervention included dynamic choice of a "travel pack" (emergency antiretroviral therapy [ART] supply, discrete ART packaging, and travel checklist), multimonth and offsite refills, facilitated transfer to out-of-community clinics, and hotline access to a mobility coordinator. The primary outcome was viral suppression (<400 copies/mL) at 48 weeks. Secondary outcomes included retention in care and ART possession., Results: From April 2021 to July 2022, 201 participants were enrolled and randomized (102 intervention, 99 control): 109 (54%) were female participants and 101 (50%) from Kenya; median age was 37 years (interquartile range: 29-43). At 48 weeks, there was no significant difference in viral suppression in intervention (85%) vs. control (86%). The intervention improved retention in care (risk ratio: 1.06[1.02-1.1]; P < 0.001) and ART possession (risk ratio: 1.07[1.03-1.11]; P < 0.001), with larger effect sizes among persons with baseline nonsuppression and high mobility (≥2 weeks out of community in previous 3 months)., Conclusions: Mobile PWH-centered care should be considered for high-risk mobile populations, including nonsuppressed and highly mobile PWH, to improve retention in care and sustain viral suppression over time., Trial Registration: NCT04810650., Competing Interests: The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)