Search

Background: Employment is a key social determinant of health. People living with HIV (PLWH) have higher unemployment rates than the general population. Vocational rehabilitation services have been shown to have significant and positive impact on employment status for PLWH. Understanding whether integrating vocational rehabilitation with health care services is acceptable, from the perspectives of PLWH and their health care providers, is an area that is understudied. Methods: We conducted a qualitative study and collected data from focus groups and interviews to understand the perspectives of stakeholders regarding the potential for vocational rehabilitation and health care integration. We completed five focus groups with 45 health care providers and one-to-one interviews with 23 PLWHs. Participants were sampled from infectious disease, primary care clinics, and AIDS Service Organizations in Toronto and Ottawa, Canada. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed. We conducted a reflexive thematic analysis of the transcripts. Findings: We found health care providers have little experience assisting patients with employment and PLWH had little experience receiving employment interventions from their health care team. This lack of integration between health care and vocational services was related to uncertainties around drug coverage, physician role and living with an episodic disability. Health care providers thought that there is potential for a larger role for health care clinics in providing employment interventions for PLWH however patients were divided. Some PLWH suggest that health care providers could provide advice on the disclosure of status, work limitations and act as advocates with employers. Interpretation: Health care providers and some PLWH recognize the importance of integrating health services with vocational services but both groups have little experience with implementing these types of interventions. Thus, there needs to be more study of such interventions, including the processes entailed and outcomes they aim to achieve. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

"Undetectable equals Untransmittable", or U=U, is a public health message designed to reduce HIV stigma and help communicate the scientific consensus that HIV cannot be sexually transmitted when a person living with HIV has an undetectable viral load. Between October 2020-February 2021 we conducted 11 in-depth interviews and 3 focus groups with diverse HIV/STI service providers (nurses, public health workers, physicians, frontline providers, and sexual health educators) in Ontario, Canada (n = 18). Our objective was to understand how U=U was communicated to sexual health service users in healthcare interactions. Interview questions were embedded in a larger study focused on improving access to HIV/STI testing. Transcripts were transcribed verbatim and analysed following grounded theory. Most providers emphasized the significance of U=U as a biomedical advancement in HIV prevention but had some challenges communicating U=U in everyday practice. We discovered four interrelated barriers when communicating the U=U message: (1) provider-perceived challenges with "zero risk" messaging (e.g., wanting to "leave a margin" of HIV risk); (2) service users not interested in receiving sexual health information (e.g., in order to provide "client centered care" some providers do not share U=U messages if service users are only interested in HIV/STI testing or if other discussions must be prioritized); (3) skepticism and HIV stigma from service users (e.g., providers explained how the hesitancy of some service users accepting the U=U message was shaped by a legacy of HIV prevention messages and persistent HIV stigma); and (4) need for more culturally appropriate resources (e.g., communities other than sexual and gender minority men; non-English speaking service users; that account for broader legal context). We discuss ways to overcome barriers to communicating the U=U message as well as the limitations and potential unintended consequences of U=U framings in the context of unequal access to HIV prevention and treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The human papillomavirus (HPV) is the most common sexually transmitted infection worldwide. Gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (GBM) living with HIV are disproportionately impacted by HPV-associated anal cancer, with rates about 100-fold that of the general population. Fortunately, HPV vaccination has proven efficacy in preventing both anogenital warts (condyloma) in males and anal pre-cancers (anal intraepithelial neoplasia; AIN) in GBM up to the age of 26. We conducted in-depth, semi-structured interviews with 25 HIV-positive gay men in Toronto to gain an understanding of their knowledge and experiences related to HPV and the HPV vaccine. These participants were part of The HPV Screening and Vaccine Evaluation (HPV-SAVE) Study, and received invitations to have anal cancer screening from their primary care doctors. Interviews were analyzed following a Grounded Theory Approach. Most participants had not received the HPV vaccine. Men described a lack of prior knowledge of the health consequences of HPV for GBM living with HIV and financial barriers to vaccine access. Participants did not articulate concerns about vaccine safety. Men frequently reported initial beliefs that HPV was predominantly—or exclusively—a risk for females or young girls, and thus they had not considered the vaccine to be necessary. Some participants remained uncertain if the current availability of the vaccine, and their newly acquired knowledge of its importance, was “too little, too late” because of their age and/or HPV exposure. Improving access and uptake of HPV vaccination requires addressing both financial barriers to access as well as increasing HPV health literacy levels, particularly by reframing the long-standing gendered associations of HPV. Physicians should provide clear, tailored messages regarding HPV vaccination. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]