Search

Mary E Hawk,1– 3 Ashley Chung,4 Stephanie L Creasy,1– 3 James E Egan1– 3 1Behavioral and Community Health Sciences, Graduate School of Public Health, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA; 2Center for LGBT Health Research, Graduate School of Public Health, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA; 3Evaluation Institute, Behavioral and Community Health Sciences, Graduate School of Public Health, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA; 4Jewish Healthcare Foundation, Pittsburgh, PA, USACorrespondence: Mary E HawkBehavioral and Community Health Sciences, Graduate School of Public Health, University of Pittsburgh, 130 DeSoto Street, Pittsburgh, PA 15261, USATel +1-412-648-2342Email mary.hawk@pitt.eduPurpose: Despite marked progress in the ability to test for, treat, and prevent HIV, the epidemic remains a significant public health concern, especially among key populations including prisoners; sex workers; transgender individuals; gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (MSM); and Black and Latinx MSM. This scoping review was conducted to provide an overview of the current research describing patient preferences for HIVST in the United States to understand what key populations value about HIVST and why they are willing to use it. A targeted search for published literature on patient preferences for HIVST was conducted using Ovid Medline, PsychINFO, and an HIVST research database.Results: We reviewed 700 abstracts and 139 full texts. We found 19 articles published between January 2014 and April 2020 that included findings related to HIVST preferences. Overall, HIVST was preferred to more traditional testing. Six primary factors emerged as important HIVST values including: 1) convenience, 2) type of test; 3) cost, 4) stigma reduction, 5) risk reduction, and 6) self-control. Linkage to care was also identified as a key factor when considering HIVST as an option. Much of what makes HIVST attractive to individuals is their ability to self-determine how HIVST can be best integrated into their lives as a harm reduction tool for stigma and sexual risk mitigation.Conclusion: While there is substantial evidence suggesting HIVST is feasible for use and there are aspects of HIVST that are beneficial and preferred over traditional testing approaches, there is a lack of rigorous implementation studies exploring how best to scale up HIVST in community settings. HIVST has the potential to be a powerful biobehavioral HIV prevention and harm reduction tool to empower individuals to engage with testing on their own terms while providing pathways to prevention and care support.Keywords: HIV, self-testing, HIVST, harm reduction, United States, patient preferences

Harm Reduction seeks to mitigate harms associated with health behaviors without the expectation that these behaviors be extinguished completely. Client-Centered Representative Payee (CCRP) is an intervention that modifies the US Social Security Administration's (SSA) Representative Payee policy by incorporating relational harm reduction. We used Human-Centered Design (HCD) methods to elucidate ways that harm reduction principles are present in and integral to CCRP and to create a blueprint for replication. Thirteen individuals familiar with CCRP brainstormed 88 statements, which were parsed, consolidated, and then independently assigned by a subgroup of participants to six principles of harm reduction. After refining the data, 29 statements aligning with harm reduction principles remained. Delineating harm reduction within CCRP, which can empower and establish trust with clients, may help other providers identify how to offer representative payee services that are respectful, compassionate, rooted in harm reduction, and ultimately improve client outcomes., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Introduction: Our previous pilot work suggests relational harm reduction strengthens relationships between people with HIV (PWH) who use drugs and their healthcare providers and improves HIV health outcomes. However, there is limited research examining ways that structural (eg, strategies like syringe service programmes) and/or relational (patient-provider relationship) harm reduction approaches in HIV clinical settings can mitigate experiences of stigma, affect patient-provider relationships and improve outcomes for PWH who use drugs. Our mixed methods, multisite, observational study aims to fill this knowledge gap and develop an intervention to operationalise harm reduction care for PWH who use drugs in HIV clinical settings., Methods and Analysis: Aim 1 will explore the relationship between healthcare providers' stigmatising attitudes towards working with PWH who use drugs and providers' acceptance and practice of structural and relational harm reduction through surveys (n=125) and interviews (n=20) with providers. Aim 2 will explore the interplay between patient-perceived harm reduction, intersectional stigma and clinical outcomes related to HIV, hepatitis C (if applicable) and substance use-related outcomes through surveys (n=500) and focus groups (k=6, total n=36) with PWH who use drugs. We will also psychometrically evaluate a 25-item scale we previously developed to assess relational harm reduction, the Patient Assessment of Provider Harm Reduction Scale. Aim 3 will use human-centred design approaches to develop and pretest an intervention to operationalise harm reduction care for PWH who use drugs in HIV clinical settings., Ethics and Dissemination: This study was approved via expedited review by the University of Pittsburgh Institutional Review Board (STUDY21090002). Study findings will be presented in peer-reviewed journals and public health conferences as well as shared with patient participants, community advisory boards and harm reduction organisations., Trial Registration Number: NCT05404750., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Trends in prescribing for nursing home (NH) residents, which may have been influenced by the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, have not been characterized., Methods: Long-term care pharmacy data from 1944 US NHs were used to evaluate trends in prescribing of antibiotics and drugs that were investigated for COVID-19 treatment, including hydroxychloroquine, famotidine, and dexamethasone. To account for seasonal variability in antibiotic prescribing and decreased NH occupancy during the pandemic, monthly prevalence of residents with a prescription dispensed per 1000 residents serviced was calculated from January to October and compared as relative percent change from 2019 to 2020., Results: In April 2020, prescribing was significantly higher in NHs for drugs investigated for COVID-19 treatment than 2019; including hydroxychloroquine (+563%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 5.87, 7.48) and azithromycin (+150%, 95% CI: 2.37, 2.63). Ceftriaxone prescribing also increased (+43%, 95% CI: 1.34, 1.54). Prescribing of dexamethasone was 36% lower in April (95% CI: .55, .73) and 303% higher in July (95% CI: 3.66, 4.45). Although azithromycin and ceftriaxone prescribing increased, total antibiotic prescribing among residents was lower from May (-5%, 95% CI: .94, .97) through October (-4%, 95% CI: .94, .97) in 2020 compared to 2019., Conclusions: During the pandemic, large numbers of residents were prescribed drugs investigated for COVID-19 treatment, and an increase in prescribing of antibiotics commonly used for respiratory infections was observed. Prescribing of these drugs may increase the risk of adverse events, without providing clear benefits. Surveillance of NH prescribing practices is critical to evaluate concordance with guideline-recommended therapy and improve resident safety., (Published by Oxford University Press for the Infectious Diseases Society of America 2021.)

Low levels of physical activity are associated with increased mortality risk, especially in cardiac patients, but most studies are based on self-report. Cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) offer an opportunity to collect data for longer periods of time. However, there is limited agreement on the best approaches for quantification of activity measures due to the time series nature of the data. We examined physical activity time series data from 235 subjects with CIEDs and at least 365 days of uninterrupted measures. Summary statistics for raw daily physical activity (minutes/day), including statistical moments (e.g., mean, standard deviation, skewness, kurtosis), time series regression coefficients, frequency domain components, and forecasted predicted values, were calculated for each individual, and used to predict occurrence of ventricular tachycardia (VT) events as recorded by the device. In unsupervised analyses using principal component analysis, we found that while certain features tended to cluster near each other, most provided a reasonable spread across activity space without a large degree of redundancy. In supervised analyses, we found several features that were associated with the outcome (P < 0.05) in univariable and multivariable approaches, but few were consistent across models. Using a machine-learning approach in which the data was split into training and testing sets, and models ranging in complexity from simple univariable logistic regression to ensemble decision trees were fit, there was no improvement in classification of risk over naïve methods for any approach. Although standard approaches identified summary features of physical activity data that were correlated with risk of VT, machine-learning approaches found that none of these features provided an improvement in classification. Future studies are needed to explore and validate methods for feature extraction and machine learning in classification of VT risk based on device-measured activity., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Objective: To compare the effects of behavioral interventions targeting decreased sedentary behavior versus increased moderate-to-vigorous intensity physical activity (MVPA) in older adults., Method: Inactive older adults ( N = 38, 68 ± 7 years old, 71% female) were randomized to 12-week interventions targeting decreased sedentary behavior ( Sit Less) or increased MVPA ( Get Active). The SenseWear armband was used to objectively assess activity in real time. Assessments included a blinded armband, the Community Health Activites Model Program for Senior (CHAMPS) questionnaire, 400-meter walk, and the Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB)., Results: Objectively measured MVPA increased in Get Active (75 ± 22 min/week, p < .001); self-reported MVPA increased in both groups ( p < .05). Sedentary behavior did not change in either group (all p > .05). Only the Sit Less group improved the SPPB score (0.5 ± 0.3, p = .046)., Discussion: Targeting reduced sedentary behavior had a greater effect on physical function among inactive but high functioning older adults over 12 weeks. Future studies of longer duration and combining increased MVPA with reduced sedentary behavior are needed.