Search

Advances in antiretroviral therapy (ART) have made it possible for persons with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) to live a lifespan approaching that of people without HIV, without progressing to AIDS or transmitting HIV to sexual partners or infants. There is, therefore, increasing emphasis on maintaining health throughout the lifespan. To receive optimal medical care and achieve desired outcomes, persons with HIV must be consistently engaged in care and able to access uninterrupted treatment, including ART. Comprehensive evidence-based HIV primary care guidance is, therefore, more important than ever. Creating a patient-centered, stigma-free care environment is essential for care engagement. Barriers to care must be decreased at the societal, health system, clinic, and individual levels. As the population ages and noncommunicable diseases arise, providing comprehensive health care for persons with HIV becomes increasingly complex, including management of multiple comorbidities and the associated challenges of polypharmacy, while also attending to HIV-specific health concerns. Clinicians must address issues specific to preventive health, including cancer screening, providing recommended vaccinations, as well as promoting sexual health, including sexually transmitted infection diagnosis, treatment, and prevention. Clinicians also must address issues for specific populations, including persons of childbearing potential, including during preconception and pregnancy; children; adolescents; and transgender and gender-diverse individuals. This guidance from an expert panel of the HIV Medicine Association of the Infectious Diseases Society of America updates the previous 2020 HIV Primary Care Guidance.

Objectives. To describe the current financial health of syringe services programs (SSPs) in the United States and to assess the predictors of SSP budget levels and associations with delivery of public health interventions. Methods. We surveyed all known SSPs operating in the United States from February to June 2022 (n = 456), of which 68% responded (n = 311). We used general estimating equations to assess factors influencing SSP budget size and estimated the effects of budget size on multiple measures of SSP services. Results. The median SSP annual budget was $100 000 (interquartile range = $20 159‒$290 000). SSPs operating in urban counties and counties with higher levels of opioid overdose mortality had significantly higher budget levels, while SSPs located in counties with higher levels of Republican voting in 2020 had significantly lower budget levels. SSP budget levels were significantly and positively associated with syringe and naloxone distribution coverage. Conclusions. Current SSP funding levels do not meet minimum benchmarks. Increased funding would help SSPs meet community health needs. Public Health Implications. Federal, state, and local initiatives should prioritize sustained SSP funding to optimize their potential in addressing multiple public health crises. (Am J Public Health. 2024;114(4):435-443. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2024.307583).

BackgroundXylazine is an increasingly common adulterant in the North American unregulated drug supply that is associated with adverse health outcomes (e.g., skin infections, overdose). However, there are significant knowledge gaps regarding how xylazine was initially identified and how syringe services program (SSP) staff and clients (people who use drugs) responded to its emergence.MethodsFrom June-July 2023, we conducted qualitative interviews with medical (e.g., clinicians) and frontline SSP staff (e.g., outreach workers) and adult clients with a history of injection drug use at a Miami-based SSP. Inductive memos identified emergent codes; thematic analysis involving team consensus established final themes.ResultsFrom interviews with SSP staff (n = 8) and clients (n = 17), xylazine emergence was identified at different times, in various ways. Initially, during summer 2022, clients identified a "tranquilizer-like substance" that worsened sedation and withdrawal and caused wounds. SSP medical staff later identified this adulterant as xylazine by treating new medical cases and through diverse information-sharing networks that included professional societies and news sources; however, frontline SSP staff and clients needed additional educational resources about xylazine and its side effects. With limited guidance on how to reduce harm from xylazine, SSP clients altered their drug consumption routes, reduced drug use, and relied on peers' experiences with the drug supply to protect themselves. Some individuals also reported preferring xylazine-adulterated opioids and increasing their drug use, including the use of stimulants to avoid over sedation.ConclusionsXylazine's emergence characterizes the current era of unprecedented shifts in the unregulated drug supply. We found that xylazine spurred important behavioral changes among people who use drugs (e.g., transitioning from injecting to smoking). Incorporating these experiences into early drug warning surveillance systems and scaling up drug-checking services and safer smoking supply distribution could help mitigate significant health harms caused by xylazine and other emergent adulterants.

BackgroundPeople who use drugs (PWUD) experience elevated HIV risk and numerous barriers to facility-based HIV testing. HIV self-testing (HIVST) could circumvent many of those barriers and is acceptable among PWUD, yet HIVST implementation for PWUD is limited. Service providers' perspectives on specific HIVST delivery strategies could help increase availability for PWUD.MethodsFrom April-November 2021, we interviewed 16 health, harm reduction, and social service providers working with PWUD in San Diego, CA. Interviews and rapid thematic analysis explored perspectives on HIVST's utility and appropriateness, as well as the feasibility of and anticipated challenges with specific HIVST delivery strategies, including peer or secondary distribution.ResultsParticipants viewed HIV as a significant threat to PWUD health and confirmed the presence of numerous barriers to local facility-based HIV testing. Participants viewed HIVST as a promising and potentially empowering solution. Based on community familiarity with secondary distribution of harm reduction supplies (i.e., naloxone) and information, participants viewed secondary distribution of HIVST kits as an appropriate and feasible strategy for increasing the reach of HIVST, but also described potential barriers (e.g., engaging socially disconnected individuals, ensuring linkages to services following HIVST) and provided suggestions for alternative HIVST kit delivery models (e.g., harm reduction vending machines).ConclusionsService providers viewed secondary distribution of HIVST kits among PWUD as promising, appropriate, and feasible, yet specialized efforts may be needed to reach the most marginalized individuals and ensure consistent provision of educational information and referral supports that maximize the impact of this approach.

ObjectiveCombination strategies generate health benefits through improved health outcomes among people living with HIV (PLHIV) and prevention of new infections. We aimed to determine health benefits attributable to improved health among PLHIV versus HIV prevention for a set of combination strategies in six US cities.DesignA dynamic HIV transmission model.MethodsUsing a model calibrated for Atlanta, Baltimore, Los Angeles, Miami, New York City (NYC) and Seattle, we assessed the health benefits of city-specific optimal combinations of evidence-based interventions implemented at publicly documented levels and at ideal (90% coverage) scale-up (2020-2030 implementation, 20-year study period). We calculated the proportion of health benefit gains (measured as quality-adjusted life-years) resulting from averted and delayed HIV infections; improved health outcomes among PLHIV; and improved health outcomes due to medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD).ResultsThe HIV-specific proportion of total benefits ranged from 68.3% (95% credible interval: 55.3-80.0) in Seattle to 98.5% (97.5-99.3) in Miami, with the rest attributable to MOUD. The majority of HIV-specific health benefits in five of six cities were attributable HIV prevention, and ranged from 33.1% (26.1-41.1) in NYC to 83.1% (79.6-86.6) in Atlanta. Scaling up to ideal service levels resulted in three to seven-fold increases in additional health benefits, mostly from MOUD, with HIV-specific health gains primarily driven by HIV prevention.ConclusionOptimal combination strategies generated a larger proportion of health benefits attributable to HIV prevention in five of six cities, underlining the substantial benefits of antiretroviral therapy engagement for the prevention of HIV transmission through viral suppression. Understanding to whom benefits accrue may be important in assessing the equity and impact of HIV investments.

BackgroundIn the USA, Black and Hispanic or Latinx individuals continue to be disproportionately affected by HIV. Applying a distributional cost-effectiveness framework, we estimated the cost-effectiveness and epidemiological impact of two combination implementation approaches to identify the approach that best meets the dual objectives of improving population health and reducing racial or ethnic health disparities.MethodsWe adapted a dynamic, compartmental HIV transmission model to characterise HIV micro-epidemics in six US cities: Atlanta, Baltimore, Los Angeles, Miami, New York, and Seattle. We considered combinations of 16 evidence-based interventions to diagnose, treat, and prevent HIV transmission according to previously documented levels of scale-up. We then identified optimal combination strategies for each city, with the distribution of each intervention implemented according to existing service levels (proportional services approach) and the racial or ethnic distribution of new diagnoses (between Black, Hispanic or Latinx, and White or other ethnicity individuals; equity approach). We estimated total costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of strategies implemented from 2020 to 2030 (health-care perspective; 20-year time horizon; 3% annual discount rate). We estimated three measures of health inequality (between-group variance, index of disparity, Theil index), incidence rate ratios, and rate differences for the selected strategies under each approach.FindingsIn all cities, optimal combination strategies under the equity approach generated more QALYs than those with proportional services, ranging from a 3·1% increase (95% credible interval [CrI] 1·4-5·3) in New York to more than double (101·9% [75·4-134·6]) in Atlanta. Compared with proportional services, the equity approach delivered lower costs over 20 years in all cities except Los Angeles; cost reductions ranged from $22·9 million (95% CrI 5·3-55·7 million) in Seattle to $579·8 million (255·4-940·5 million) in Atlanta. The equity approach also reduced incidence disparities and health inequality measures in all cities except Los Angeles.InterpretationEquity-focused HIV combination implementation strategies that reduce disparities for Black and Hispanic or Latinx individuals can significantly improve population health, reduce costs, and drive progress towards Ending the HIV Epidemic goals in the USA.FundingNational Institute on Drug Abuse.