Search

Aim: Peer support services have been shown to be beneficial in increasing uptake and adherence to treatment in other areas but few examples of these services exist in hepatitis C (HCV) care. This study examined the performance of two community-controlled peer support services operating within a larger study aimed at increasing access to HCV care and treatment for opiate substitution treatment (OST) clients, ETHOS.Methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted in two clinics with three groups of participants: clients (n=31), staff (n=8) and peer workers (n=3) and examined the operation of the service in relation to process, outputs and impacts.Results: There was a very strong positive response to the peer worker services reported by staff and clients who had and had not interacted with a peer worker. A number of changes were reported that were not explicit goals of the service including providing access to additional services for clients and staff, peer workers acting as mediators between clients and staff and a less tangible notion of a changing "feel" of the clinic to a more positive and client-friendly social and physical space. Explicit goals of the service were also reported in peer workers supporting clients to consider and prepare for treatment (via blood tests and other assessments) as well as provide information and support about treatment.Conclusions: The peer support service was acceptable to clients and clinic staff. All groups of participants noted that the service met its goals of engaging clients, building trusting relationships and providing instrumental support for clients to access HCV treatment. Peer workers may also contribute to more effective deployment of health resources by preparing clients for clinical engagement with HCV health workers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Recent advances in the treatment of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection provide the possibility of eliminating HCV as a public health threat. This focus on HCV elimination through treatment, however, is also driving a concomitant focus on ‘achieving cure’ as the primary outcome of treatment. The aim of this paper is to explore what people who inject drugs consider to be important in relation to outcomes of HCV treatment, and whether there are outcomes ‘beyond cure’ that might be important to understand as part of improving engagement in treatment. Methods: A peer researcher with experience of both HCV treatment and injecting drug use conducted interviews with 24 people in the following groups in Melbourne, Australia: (1) people who had refused or deferred HCV treatment; (2) people who were actively thinking about, planning and/or about to commence HCV treatment; (3) people currently undertaking HCV treatment and (4) people who had recently completed HCV treatment. Results: The findings show that people who inject drugs are seeking outcomes ‘beyond cure’ including improved physical and mental health, positive changes in identity and social relationships and managing future health and risk. Participants indicated that these other outcomes had not been addressed within their experience of HCV treatment. Conclusion: While cure is an obvious outcome of HCV treatment, patients are seeking change in other areas of their lives. This study also provides valuable insights for the development of patient-reported measures in this context, which would be an important step towards more patient-centred approaches to HCV treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]