Search

Novel "differentiated service delivery" models for HIV treatment that reduce clinic visit frequency, minimize waiting time, and deliver treatment in the community promise retention improvement for HIV treatment in Sub-Saharan Africa. Quantitative assessments of differentiated service delivery (DSD) feature most preferred by patient populations do not widely exist but could inform selection and prioritization of different DSD models. We used a discrete choice experiment (DCE) to elicit patient preferences of HIV treatment services and how they differ across DSD models. We surveyed 18+year-olds, enrolled in HIV care for ≥6 months between February-March, 2019 at four facilities in Kisumu County, Kenya. DCE offered patients a series of comparisons between three treatment models, each varying across seven attributes: ART refill location, quantity of dispensed ART at each refill, medication pick-up hours, type of adherence support, clinical visit frequency, staff attitude, and professional cadre of person providing ART refills. We used hierarchical Bayesian model to estimate attribute importance and relative desirability of care characteristics, latent class analysis (LCA) for groups of preferences and mixed logit model for willingness to trade analysis. Of 242 patients, 128 (53.8%) were females and 150 (62.8%) lived in rural areas. Patients placed greatest importance on ART refill location [19.5% (95% CI 18.4, 10.6) and adherence support [19.5% (95% CI 18.17, 20.3)], followed by staff attitude [16.1% (95% CI 15.1, 17.2)]. In the mixed logit, patients preferred nice attitude of staff (coefficient = 1.60), refill ART health center (Coeff = 1.58) and individual adherence support (Coeff = 1.54), 3 or 6 months for ART refill (Coeff = 0.95 and 0.80, respectively) and pharmacists (instead of lay health workers) providing ART refill (Coeff = 0.64). No differences were observed by gender or urbanicity. LCA revealed two distinct groups (59.5% vs. 40.5%). Participants preferred 3 to 6-month refill interval or clinic visit spacing, which DSD offers stable patients. While DSD has encouraged community ART group options, our results suggest strong preferences for ART refills from health-centers or pharmacists over lay-caregivers or community members. These preferences held across gender&urban/rural subpopulations.

Novel “differentiated service delivery” models for HIV treatment that reduce clinic visit frequency, minimize waiting time, and deliver treatment in the community promise retention improvement for HIV treatment in Sub-Saharan Africa. Quantitative assessments of differentiated service delivery (DSD) feature most preferred by patient populations do not widely exist but could inform selection and prioritization of different DSD models. We used a discrete choice experiment (DCE) to elicit patient preferences of HIV treatment services and how they differ across DSD models. We surveyed 18+year-olds, enrolled in HIV care for ≥6 months between February-March, 2019 at four facilities in Kisumu County, Kenya. DCE offered patients a series of comparisons between three treatment models, each varying across seven attributes: ART refill location, quantity of dispensed ART at each refill, medication pick-up hours, type of adherence support, clinical visit frequency, staff attitude, and professional cadre of person providing ART refills. We used hierarchical Bayesian model to estimate attribute importance and relative desirability of care characteristics, latent class analysis (LCA) for groups of preferences and mixed logit model for willingness to trade analysis. Of 242 patients, 128 (53.8%) were females and 150 (62.8%) lived in rural areas. Patients placed greatest importance on ART refill location [19.5% (95% CI 18.4, 10.6) and adherence support [19.5% (95% CI 18.17, 20.3)], followed by staff attitude [16.1% (95% CI 15.1, 17.2)]. In the mixed logit, patients preferred nice attitude of staff (coefficient = 1.60), refill ART health center (Coeff = 1.58) and individual adherence support (Coeff = 1.54), 3 or 6 months for ART refill (Coeff = 0.95 and 0.80, respectively) and pharmacists (instead of lay health workers) providing ART refill (Coeff = 0.64). No differences were observed by gender or urbanicity. LCA revealed two distinct groups (59.5% vs. 40.5%). Participants preferred 3 to 6-month refill interval or clinic visit spacing, which DSD offers stable patients. While DSD has encouraged community ART group options, our results suggest strong preferences for ART refills from health-centers or pharmacists over lay-caregivers or community members. These preferences held across gender&urban/rural subpopulations.

Abstract Background Despite cervical cancer being preventable with effective screening programs, it is the most common cancer and the leading cause of cancer-related death among women in many countries in Africa. Screening involving pelvic examination may not be feasible or acceptable in limited-resource settings. We sought to evaluate women’s perspectives on human papillomavirus (HPV) self-sampling as part of a larger trial on cervical cancer prevention implementation strategies in rural western Kenya. Methods We invited 120 women participating in a cluster randomized trial of cervical cancer screening implementation strategies in Migori County, Kenya for in-depth interviews. We explored reasons for testing, experience with and ability to complete HPV self-sampling, importance of clinician involvement during screening, factors and people contributing to screening decision-making, and ways to encourage other women to come for screening. We used validated theoretical frameworks to analyze the qualitative data. Results Women reported having positive experiences with the HPV self-sampling strategy. The factors facilitating uptake included knowledge and beliefs such as prior awareness of HPV, personal perception of cervical cancer risk, desire for improved health outcomes, and peer and partner encouragement. Logistical and screening facilitators included confidence in the ability to complete HPV self-sampling strategy, proximity to screening sites and feelings of privacy and comfort conducting the HPV self- sampling. The barriers to screening included fear of need for a pelvic exam, fear of disease and death associated with cervical cancer. We classified these findings as capabilities, opportunities and motivations for health behavior using the COM-B framework. Conclusions Overall, HPV self-sampling was an acceptable cervical cancer screening strategy that seemed to meet the needs of the women in this community. These findings will further inform aspects of implementation, including outreach messaging, health education, screening sites and emphasis on availability and effectiveness of preventative treatment for women who screen positive.