Search

Little research has examined gender differences in reporting of condom use, which is the goal of our analysis. A baseline study was conducted in two urban clinics and we examined data from sexually active clients entering HIV care who enrolled in a prospective longitudinal cohort study. The primary outcome was consistent condom use and determinant variables were demographics, physical health and immune status, economic well-being, relationship characteristics, psychosocial functioning, and self-efficacy. Of 280 participants, 129 were males and 151 females, and 41.7% had at least some secondary education; 60.7% did not always use condoms. Nearly half (48.1%) of men reported always using condoms compared to 31.8% of females. In bivariate analyses, men who consistently use condoms were more likely to be working, have a primary partner who was HIV negative, to have disclosed their HIV status to their primary partner, and to have higher general self-efficacy and condom use self-efficacy compared to men who did not always use condoms. Higher general self-efficacy and condom use self-efficacy were the only variables associated with reported consistent condom use among women. In regression analysis, working in the last 7 days, general self efficacy, and condom use self-efficacy were associated with consistent condom use among men. These findings reveal low rates of consistent condom use among people living with HIV, and a gender difference with men more likely to report consistent condom use. These data suggest the need for gender sensitive prevention programs and strategies, including programs that can provide women with greater control and self-efficacy regarding use of protective methods.

Most studies of HIV disclosure in Africa have focused on disclosure to spouses and sexual partners, and particularly among women. Few have examined disclosure to family, friends, and others. Understanding the reasons for disclosure and nondisclosure and how these reasons differ by disclosure target is needed for effective prevention interventions. Using a case study design and content analysis, this study explored whether the reasons for disclosure decisions differ by the nature of the relationship to the disclosure target. Semistructured interviews were conducted with 40 HIV clients in Kampala, with even stratification by gender and age. Most (95%) respondents reported disclosing to someone; among these, 84% disclosed to family members, 63% to friends, 21% to workplace colleagues, and 18% to others. Of the 24 participants who had a spouse, 13 (54%) reported disclosing to a spouse. The most common reasons for disclosure were to receive support (76%), associated with disclosure to family members; relationship ties (76%), associated with disclosure to all target types; explaining change in behavior or appearance (61%), associated with disclosing to family and friends; and HIV prevention (50%), associated with disclosure to spouse/partner and friends. The most common reasons for nondisclosure were: fear of abandonment, particularly among young women disclosing to spouse/partner; inaccessibility to the disclosure target; and not wanting to worry/upset the disclosure target. This exploratory analysis suggests that reasons for disclosure and nondisclosure differ depending on the targets of disclosure, highlighting the need for tailoring interventions for improving disclosure decisions making and outcomes.

With dramatic increases in antiretroviral therapy (ART) provision, many clinics in sub-Saharan Africa are congested, but little attention has focused on the efficiency of clinics. Between April and June 2008, we conducted a time-and-motion study to assess patient flow at three HIV clinics in Uganda. Mulago HIV Clinic had 6,700 active patients, compared with 2,700 at Mbarara Municipal Council Clinic (MMC) and 2,800 at Reachout Mbuya (ROM). Mulago had six doctors and eight nurses; MMC had two doctors and two nurses, and ROM had two doctors and 12 nurses. Mulago and MMC used a doctor-led model, whereas ROM used a nurse-led model. Randomly selected patients were tracked, with data collected on time waiting and time spent with providers. Patients were categorized as new, preparing for ART, early ART, stable ART, or non-ART. Doctors indicated whether the patients they saw warranted their consultation. Data were collected on 689 patients (230 at Mulago, 229 at MMC, and 230 at ROM). Overall waiting time was longest at ROM (274 min; 209–346) and Mulago ISS (270 min; 230–336) compared with MMC (183 min; 148–233). Nurse-clinicians at ROM spent twice the time with patients compared with the doctors at Mulago. At Mulago, doctors indicated that 27% of the patients they reviewed did not need to see a doctor, compared with 45% at MMC. Task-shifting may not be efficient in terms of time. More-effective triage and longer visit intervals could improve patient flow and capacity for cost-effective scale-up.

Liver disease is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality among patients coinfected with HIV and hepatitis C (HCV), yet few HIV coinfected patients actually receive HCV treatment. Providers must first be willing to prescribe treatment, but the patient ultimately makes the decision to accept or decline a treatment recommendation. We used a process model framework to explore the factors influencing patients' treatment decision-making. We conducted semistructured interviews with 35 HIV coinfected patients and 11 primary care providers at three HIV clinics in Los Angeles, California. Patients reported that stability of HIV disease, perceived need for HCV treatment, treatment readiness, willingness to deal with side effects, absence of substance abuse, and stability of mental health and overall life circumstances are key factors influencing treatment decision-making. Patients also spoke of the influence of the trusting relationship that many had with their provider, and providers acknowledged an awareness of the influence of how they present the risks and benefits of HCV treatment and the overall tone of their recommendation (encouraging, dissuasive, or neutral). These results speak to a social decision-making process between the patient and provider-a partnership that involves sequential interactions whereby both the patient and provider may influence the other's evaluation of the patient's readiness for treatment, with treatment initiation dependent on both agreeing on the need for treatment and the patient's readiness for treatment.

With millions in need of HIV antiretroviral therapy (ART) in the developing world, and scarce human and fiscal resources available, we conducted a formative evaluation of scale-up operations at clinics associated with AIDS Healthcare Foundation in Africa to identify lessons learned for improving scale-up efficiency. Site visits were made to six selected clinics in Uganda, Zambia, and South Africa, during which semistructured interviews with key stake-holders and observation of client flows and clinic operations were performed. This evaluation revealed the following lessons related to factors that are critical to efficient ART scale-up: (1) to ensure steady ART uptake, it is important to involve the community and community leaders in outreach, HIV education, and program decision-making; (2) minimizing bottlenecks to smooth patient flow requires efficient staff allocation to appropriate clinical duties, streamlined clinic visit schedule protocols, and tapping clients and the HIV community as a key source of labor; (3) to minimize clients dropping out of care, structures should be developed that enable clients to provide support and a "safety net" for helping each other remain in care; (4) computerized record management systems are essential for accurate antiretroviral inventory and dispensing records, quality assurance monitoring, and client enrollment records and visit scheduling; (5) effective organizational management and human resource policies are essential to maintain high job performance and satisfaction and limit burnout; (6) to maximize impact on social and economic health, it is important for ART programs to develop effective mechanisms for coordinating and referring clients to support service organizations.

Despite the absence of empirical evidence, serious mental illness is assumed to be a high risk factor for nonadherence to HIV antiretroviral regimens. To assess antiretroviral adherence among persons with serious mental illness, we conducted a study in which adherence was observed over a 2-week period with electronic monitoring bottle caps and self-report. Forty-seven participants enrolled, with all but two (96%) completing the study. Psychiatric diagnoses included bipolar depression (n = 24), schizophrenia (n = 12), schizoaffective disorder (n = 5), and major depression with psychotic features (n = 6). Mean adherence (proportion of prescribed doses taken) was 66% (standard deviation [SD] = 34), as measured by electronic monitoring; 40% demonstrated at least 90% adherence, but 31% had less than 50% adherence. Self-reported adherence to psychotropics was moderately correlated with self-reported (r = 0.45, p0.05) and electronically monitored (r = 0.39, p0.05) antiretroviral adherence. Viral load (log(10)) was negatively correlated with electronically monitored (r = -0.28, p0.10) and self-reported (r = -0.39, p0.05) antiretroviral adherence, after controlling for the length of time on treatment. These findings suggest that many patients with serious mental illness are able to adhere very well to antiretroviral regimens, yet a substantial proportion of our sample displayed poor adherence, indicating the need for research to further assess the factors that influence adherence to antiretrovirals in this population.

This study reports on the prevalence and predictors of adherence as measured by self-report, medication diaries, and electronic monitoring. A sample of 180 patients receiving human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) antiretroviral therapy were randomized to one of three adherence surveillance methods (electronic monitoring caps, patient medication diaries, no surveillance control group) for 4 weeks, with adherence measured by self-report at study end point; 173 (96%) participants completed the study. Most participants were male (82%), non-white (68%), and unemployed (84%); mean self-reported CD4 count was 406 cells/mm,3 and 31% reported having undetectable viral load. The three methods of adherence measurement revealed moderate (electronic monitoring: 80.6%) to high (self-report: 93.7%; diaries: 92.6%) rates of adherence. Although there were differences across adherence measures, variables that were identified as correlates of lower adherence by all three methods included living with others or having a larger household, current symptomatology, and cognitive functioning deficits. This consensus across adherence measures strengthens the validity of these identified predictors and their potential value in informing the development of adherence interventions, as well as increases the validity of the three adherence measures.