Search

Introduction: Mobility is associated with worse outcomes across the HIV treatment cascade, especially among men. However, little is known about the mechanisms that link mobility and poor HIV outcomes and what types of mobility most increase the risk of treatment interruption among men in southern Africa. Methods: From August 2021 to January 2022, we conducted a mixed‐methods study with men living with HIV (MLHIV) but not currently receiving antiretroviral therapy (ART) in Malawi. Data collection was embedded within two larger trials (ENGAGE and IDEaL trials). We analysed baseline survey data of 223 men enrolled in the trials who reported being mobile (defined as spending ≥14 nights away from home in the past 12 months) using descriptive statistics and negative binomial regressions. We then recruited 32 men for in‐depth interviews regarding their travel experiences and ART utilization. We analysed qualitative data using constant comparative methods. Results: Survey data showed that 34% of men with treatment interruptions were mobile, with a median of 60 nights away from home in the past 12 months; 69% of trips were for income generation. More nights away from home in the past 12 months and having fewer household assets were associated with longer periods out of care. In interviews, men reported that travel was often unplanned, and men were highly vulnerable to exploitive employer demands, which led to missed appointments and ART interruption. Men made major efforts to stay in care but were often unable to access care on short notice, were denied ART refills at non‐home facilities and/or were treated poorly by providers, creating substantial barriers to remaining in and returning to care. Men desired additional multi‐month dispensing (MMD), the ability to refill treatment at any facility in Malawi, and streamlined pre‐travel refills at home facilities. Conclusions: Men prioritize ART and struggle with the trade‐offs between their own health and providing for their families. Mobility is an essential livelihood strategy for MLHIV in Malawi, but it creates conflict with ART retention, largely due to inflexible health systems. Targeted counselling and peer support, access to ART services anywhere in the country, and MMD may improve outcomes for mobile men. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Mobility is common and an essential livelihood strategy in sub‐Saharan Africa (SSA). Mobile people suffer worse outcomes at every stage of the HIV care cascade compared to non‐mobile populations. Definitions of mobility vary widely, and research on the role of temporary mobility (as opposed to permanent migration) in HIV treatment outcomes is often lacking. In this article, we review the current landscape of mobility and HIV care research to identify what is already known, gaps in the literature, and recommendations for future research. Discussion: Mobility in SSA is closely linked to income generation, though caregiving, climate change and violence also contribute to the need to move. Mobility is likely to increase in the coming decades, both due to permanent migration and increased temporary mobility, which is likely much more common. We outline three central questions regarding mobility and HIV treatment outcomes in SSA. First, it is unclear what aspects of mobility matter most for HIV care outcomes and if high‐risk mobility can be identified or predicted, which is necessary to facilitate targeted interventions for mobile populations. Second, it is unclear what groups are most vulnerable to mobility‐associated treatment interruption and other adverse outcomes. And third, it is unclear what interventions can improve HIV treatment outcomes for mobile populations. Conclusions: Mobility is essential for people living with HIV in SSA. HIV treatment programmes and broader health systems must understand and adapt to human mobility, both to promote the rights and welfare of mobile people and to end the HIV pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]