Search

Food insecurity is widely documented among people living with HIV (PLWH) worldwide, and it presents significant challenges across the spectrum of HIV care and support. In North America, the prevalence of food insecurity among PLWH exceeds 50%. In the province of British Columbia (BC), it exceeds 65%. It comes as no surprise that food has become an essential tool in supporting and engaging with PLWH. Over the past decade, however, a shift has taken place, and food has become an incentive to boost uptake and outcomes of prevention, testing, treatment, and support. To explore this practice, we drew on a qualitative case study of incentives in the care and support of PLWH. This paper presents the findings of a targeted analysis of interviews (N = 25) that discuss food incentives and explores two main themes that shed light on this practice: (1) Using food to engage versus to incentivize and (2) Food is more beneficial and more ethical. Providers perceived food more positively than other incentives, despite the goal remaining somewhat the same. Incentives, such as cash or gift cards, were considered ethically problematic and less helpful (and potentially harmful), whereas food addressed a basic need and felt more ethical. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The experiences of nurses who blew the whistle during the COVID‐19 pandemic have exposed gaps and revealed an urgent need to revisit our understanding of whistleblowing. Aim: The aim was to develop a better understanding of whistleblowing during a pandemic by using the experiences and lessons learned of Quebec nurses who blew the whistle during the first wave of COVID‐19 as a case study. More specifically, to explore why and how nurses blew the whistle, what types of wrongdoing triggered their decision to do so and how context shaped the whistleblowing process as well as its consequences (including perceived consequences). Design: The study followed a single‐case study design with three embedded units of analysis. Methods: We used content analysis to analyse 83 news stories and 597 forms posted on a whistleblowing online platform. We also conducted 15 semi‐structured interviews with nurses and analysed this data using a thematic analysis approach. Finally, we triangulated the findings. Results: We identified five themes across the case study. (1) During the first wave of COVID‐19, Quebec nurses experienced a shifting sense of loyalty and relationship to workplace culture. (2) They witnessed exceedingly high numbers of intersecting wrongdoings amplified by mismanagement and long‐standing issues. (3) They reported a lack of trust and transparency; thus, a need for external whistleblowing. (4) They used whistleblowing to reclaim their rights (notably, the right to speak) and build collective solidarity. (5) Finally, they saw whistleblowing as an act of moral courage in the face of a system in crisis. Together, these themes elucidate why and how nurse whistleblowing is different in pandemic times. Conclusion: Our findings offer a more nuanced understanding of nurse whistleblowing and address important gaps in knowledge. They also highlight the need to rethink external whistleblowing, develop whistleblowing tools and advocate for whistleblowing protection. Impact In many ways, the COVID‐19 pandemic has challenged our foundational understanding of whistleblowing and, as a result, it has limited the usefulness of existing literature on the topic for reasons that will be brought to light in this paper. We believe that studying the uniqueness of whistleblowing during a pandemic can address this gap by describing why and how health care workers blow the whistle during a pandemic and situating this experience within a broader social, political, organizational context. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Each of the antiretroviral drugs that are currently used to stop the progression of HIV infection causes its own specific side effects. Despite the expansion, multiplication, and simplification of treatment options over the past decade, side effects continue to affect people living with HIV. Yet, we see a clear disconnect between the way side effects are normalized, routinized, and framed in clinical practice and the way they are experienced by people living with HIV. This paper builds on the premise that new approaches are needed to understand side effects in a manner that is more reflective of the subjective accounts of people living with HIV. Drawing on the work of Deleuze and Guattari, it offers an original application of the theory of 'assemblage'. This theory offers a new way of theorizing side effects, and ultimately the relationship between the body and antiretroviral drugs (as technologies). Combining theory with examples derived from empirical data, we examine the multiple ways in which the body connects not only to the drugs but also to people, things, and systems. Our objective is to illustrate how this theory dares us to think differently about side effects and allows us to originally (re)think the experience of taking antiretroviral drugs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: we present the findings of a grounded theory study designed to gain a critical understanding of the experience of side effects of treatment for HIV. Method: this study was undertaken in Canada’s capital region with 50 participants through a questionnaire. Data analysis began with the initial line-by-line coding of key interviews. After it were categorized. Results: three main categories emerged from the data: the side effects, the experience, and the connections. Conclusion: the first category suggests that we need to change how we think about side effects in order to take into account the context in which they are experienced as well as the types and nature of side effects. The second category puts forward the idea that the experience of side effects is composed of three interrelated processes: becoming with, living with, and dealing with. Finally, the third category points to new connections that are formed with people, things and systems in the presence of side effects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Background: Facial lipoatrophy has been described as the most distressing and stigmatizing expression of the lipodystrophy syndrome, a syndrome that is caused by antiretroviral combination therapy. In recent years, reconstructive treatments (such as poly-l-lactic acid and polyalkylimide) have been increasingly considered for this condition. These treatments allow for facial contours and facial fullness to be restored while being minimally invasive. Objective: The main objective of this qualitative research was to explore and describe the experience of people who suffer from facial lipoatrophy, specifically in regard to reconstructive treatments. Method: A qualitative design, which incorporates explorative and descriptive attributes, was thought to be an appropriate choice for this research project. The data was collected using semi-structured interviews and was then analyzed following the principles of thematic analysis. Participants: Over a period of three months, 11 men and 1 woman enrolled in the study which was conducted in Montreal (Quebec), Canada. Findings: Overall, participants explained that facial lipoatrophy had forced them into a situation of intense vulnerability by making them recognizable as persons living with HIV/AIDS and discreditable in the eyes of others. In this sense, they were willing to go to great lengths to restore their facial features and regain a sense of normalcy. Findings revealed that people who suffer from facial lipoatrophy engage in a process of reconstruction to reduce the visibility and disruptiveness of their condition but face many uncertainties along the way. Conclusions: While the findings of this research corroborated what has been previously stated by other researchers about the impact of reconstructive treatments, they also shed light on the consequences of not making these treatments accessible as well as the undocumented realities of those who cannot afford the recommended course of dermal fillers. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

• Public experiences of surveillance and control are recreated in SROs. • The liminality of SROs between public and private space structure experiences of privacy and safety. • Using drug alone can be both a way to claim privacy and a survival strategy within the context of SRO housing. • Interventions accounting for broader contextual factors that render using alone as instrumental to survival are needed to reduce vulnerability to overdose and other harms. Across North America most overdose deaths occur in housing, largely due to individuals using drugs alone. In cities, fatalities are disproportionately concentrated in low-income housing, including single room occupancy (SRO) housing. While research has highlighted how SROs operate as risk environments for various poor outcomes, there has been little attention to specific drug use practices (i.e., using alone) associated with overdose vulnerability in these spaces. This study explores how environmental contexts of SROs shape overdose risks, with specific attention to practices of using drugs alone. In-depth semi-structured interviews were conducted with 30 people who use drugs (PWUD) living in Vancouver SROs. Interviews covered topics such as social-structural environments of housing, drug use practices, and housing-based harm reduction. Thematic analysis drew on the intersectional risk environment framework. Narratives positioned SROs as extensions of public space, with similar expectations of risks and behaviours as in public spaces. For some participants, using alone in their room was characterized as a practice in claiming privacy within the context of a public existence. Participants highlighted how certain features of SRO's social-structural environments were routinely leveraged against them (e.g., security cameras, staff surveillance), suggesting using alone as a tactic to minimize risks of hyper-surveillance and punitive policies. Further, participants discussed using alone as "safer," describing how this practice mitigated place-based risks of social-structural harms (e.g., violence, criminalization) in ways that eclipsed overdose risk. Using drugs alone may be understood as a spatial negotiation of vulnerability to diverse harms produced by environmental contexts of SROs. Interventions accounting for broader contextual factors (e.g., improvements housing quality/quantity, providing a safer supply of drugs) that render using alone as instrumental to survival, and that reduce the implicit threat of punishment from intensive surveillance and control practices are critical to reduce vulnerability to overdose and other harms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]