Doula Services Within a Healthy Start Program: Increasing Access for an Underserved Population

Purpose: Women of color in the United States, particularly in high-poverty neighborhoods, experience high rates of poor birth outcomes, including cesarean section, preterm birth, low birthweight, and infant mortality. Doula care has been linked to improvements in many perinatal outcomes, but women of color and low-income women often face barriers in accessing doula support. Description: To address this issue, the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene’s Healthy Start Brooklyn introduced the By My Side Birth Support Program in 2010. The goal was to complement other maternal home-visiting programs by providing doula support during labor and birth, along with prenatal and postpartum visits. Between 2010 and 2015, 489 infants were born to women enrolled in the program. Assessment: Data indicate that By My Side is a promising model of support for Healthy Start projects nationwide. Compared to the project area, program participants had lower rates of preterm birth (6.3 vs. 12.4%, p \u3c 0.001) and low birthweight (6.5 vs. 11.1%, p = 0.001); however, rates of cesarean birth did not differ significantly (33.5 vs. 36.9%, p = 0.122). Further research is needed to explore possible reasons for this finding, and to examine the influence of doula support on birth outcomes among populations with high rates of chronic disease and stressors such as poverty, racism, and exposure to violence. However, feedback from participants indicates that doula support is highly valued and helps give women a voice in consequential childbirth decisions. Conclusion: Available evidence suggests that doula services may be an important component of an effort to address birth inequities

The IeDEA Harmonist Data Toolkit: A Data Quality and Data Sharing Solution for a Global HIV Research Consortium.

We describe the design, implementation, and impact of a data harmonization, data quality checking, and dynamic report generation application in an international observational HIV research network. The IeDEA Harmonist Data Toolkit is a web-based application written in the open source programming language R, employs the R/Shiny and RMarkdown packages, and leverages the REDCap data collection platform for data model definition and user authentication. The Toolkit performs data quality checks on uploaded datasets, checks for conformance with the network's common data model, displays the results both interactively and in downloadable reports, and stores approved datasets in secure cloud storage for retrieval by the requesting investigator. Including stakeholders and users in the design process was key to the successful adoption of the application. A survey of regional data managers as well as initial usage metrics indicate that the Toolkit saves time and results in improved data quality, with a 61% mean reduction in number of error records in a dataset. The generalized application design allows the Toolkit to be easily adapted to other research networks

Regression discontinuity analysis demonstrated varied effect of Treat-All on CD4 testing among Southern African countries

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether Treat-All policy impacted laboratory testing practices of antiretroviral therapy (ART) programs in Southern Africa.STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We used HIV cohort data from Lesotho, Malawi, Mozambique, South Africa, Zambia and Zimbabwe in a regression discontinuity design to estimate changes in pre-ART CD4 testing and viral load monitoring following national Treat-all adoption that occurred during 2016-2017. This study included more than 230,000 ART-naïve people living with HIV (PLHIV) aged five years or older who started ART within two years of national Treat-All adoption.RESULTS: We found pre-ART CD4 testing decreased following adoption of Treat-All recommendations in Malawi (-21.4 percentage points (pp), 95% CI: -26.8, -16.0) and in Mozambique (-8.8pp, 95% CI: -14.9, -2.8), but increased in Zambia (+2.7pp, 95% CI: +0.4, +5.1). Treat-All policy had no effect on viral load monitoring, except among females in South Africa (+7.1pp, 95% CI: +1.1, +13.0).CONCLUSION: Treat-All policy expanded ART eligibility, but led to reductions in pre-ART CD4 testing in some countries that may weaken advanced HIV disease management. Continued and expanded support of CD4 and viral load laboratory capacity is needed to further improve treatment successes and allow for uniform evaluation of ART implementation across Southern Africa.</p

Service delivery challenges in HIV care during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic: results from a site assessment survey across the global IeDEA consortium.

INTRODUCTION Interruptions in treatment pose risks for people with HIV (PWH) and threaten progress in ending the HIV epidemic; however, the COVID-19 pandemic's impact on HIV service delivery across diverse settings is not broadly documented. METHODS From September 2020 to March 2021, the International epidemiology Databases to Evaluate AIDS (IeDEA) research consortium surveyed 238 HIV care sites across seven geographic regions to document constraints in HIV service delivery during the first year of the pandemic and strategies for ensuring care continuity for PWH. Descriptive statistics were stratified by national HIV prevalence (<1%, 1-4.9% and ≥5%) and country income levels. RESULTS Questions about pandemic-related consequences for HIV care were completed by 225 (95%) sites in 42 countries with low (n = 82), medium (n = 86) and high (n = 57) HIV prevalence, including low- (n = 57), lower-middle (n = 79), upper-middle (n = 39) and high- (n = 50) income countries. Most sites reported being subject to pandemic-related restrictions on travel, service provision or other operations (75%), and experiencing negative impacts (76%) on clinic operations, including decreased hours/days, reduced provider availability, clinic reconfiguration for COVID-19 services, record-keeping interruptions and suspension of partner support. Almost all sites in low-prevalence and high-income countries reported increased use of telemedicine (85% and 100%, respectively), compared with less than half of sites in high-prevalence and lower-income settings. Few sites in high-prevalence settings (2%) reported suspending antiretroviral therapy (ART) clinic services, and many reported adopting mitigation strategies to support adherence, including multi-month dispensing of ART (95%) and designating community ART pick-up points (44%). While few sites (5%) reported stockouts of first-line ART regimens, 10-11% reported stockouts of second- and third-line regimens, respectively, primarily in high-prevalence and lower-income settings. Interruptions in HIV viral load (VL) testing included suspension of testing (22%), longer turnaround times (41%) and supply/reagent stockouts (22%), but did not differ across settings. CONCLUSIONS While many sites in high HIV prevalence settings and lower-income countries reported introducing or expanding measures to support treatment adherence and continuity of care, the COVID-19 pandemic resulted in disruptions to VL testing and ART supply chains that may negatively affect the quality of HIV care in these settings

Real-world use and outcomes of dolutegravir-containing antiretroviral therapy in HIV and tuberculosis co-infection: a site survey and cohort study in sub-Saharan Africa.

INTRODUCTION Dolutegravir is being scaled up globally as part of antiretroviral therapy (ART), but for people with HIV and tuberculosis co-infection, its use is complicated by a drug-drug interaction with rifampicin requiring an additional daily dose of dolutegravir. This represents a disadvantage over efavirenz, which does not have a major drug-drug interaction with rifampicin. We sought to describe HIV clinic practices for prescribing concomitant dolutegravir and rifampicin, and characterize virologic outcomes among patients with tuberculosis co-infection receiving dolutegravir or efavirenz. METHODS Within the four sub-Saharan Africa regions of the International epidemiology Databases to Evaluate AIDS consortium, we conducted a site survey (2021) and a cohort study (2015-2021). The cohort study used routine clinical data and included patients newly initiating or already receiving dolutegravir or efavirenz at the time of tuberculosis diagnosis. Patients were followed from tuberculosis diagnosis until viral suppression (<1000 copies/ml), a competing event (switching ART regimen; loss to program/death) or administrative censoring at 12 months. RESULTS In the survey, 86 of 90 (96%) HIV clinics in 18 countries reported prescribing dolutegravir to patients who were receiving rifampicin as part of tuberculosis treatment, with 77 (90%) reporting that they use twice-daily dosing of dolutegravir, of which 74 (96%) reported having 50 mg tablets available to accommodate twice-daily dosing. The cohort study included 3563 patients in 11 countries, with 67% newly or recently initiating ART. Among patients receiving dolutegravir (n = 465), the cumulative incidence of viral suppression was 58.9% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 54.3-63.3%), switching ART regimen was 4.1% (95% CI: 2.6-6.2%) and loss to program/death was 23.4% (95% CI: 19.7-27.4%). Patients receiving dolutegravir had improved viral suppression compared with patients receiving efavirenz who had a tuberculosis diagnosis before site dolutegravir availability (adjusted subdistribution hazard ratio [aSHR]: 1.47, 95% CI: 1.28-1.68) and after site dolutegravir availability (aSHR 1.28, 95% CI: 1.08-1.51). CONCLUSIONS At a programmatic level, dolutegravir was being widely prescribed in sub-Saharan Africa for people with HIV and tuberculosis co-infection with a dose adjustment for the drug-drug interaction with rifampicin. Despite this more complex regimen, our cohort study revealed that dolutegravir did not negatively impact viral suppression

Clinical and programmatic outcomes of HIV-exposed infants enrolled in care at geographically diverse clinics, 1997-2021: A cohort study

Background Although 1.3 million women with HIV give birth annually, care and outcomes for HIVexposed infants remain incompletely understood. We analyzed programmatic and health indicators in a large, multidecade global dataset of linked mother-infant records from clinics and programs associated with the International epidemiology Databases to Evaluate AIDS (IeDEA) consortium. Methods and findings HIV-exposed infants were eligible for this retrospective cohort analysis if enrolled at <18 months at 198 clinics in 10 countries across 5 IeDEA regions: East Africa (EA), Central Africa (CA), West Africa (WA), Southern Africa (SA), and the Caribbean, Central, and South America network (CCASAnet). We estimated cumulative incidences of DNA PCR testing, loss to follow-up (LTFU), HIV diagnosis, and death through 24 months of age using proportional subdistribution hazard models accounting for competing risks. Competing risks were transfer, care withdrawal, and confirmation of negative HIV status, along with LTFU and death, when not the outcome of interest. In CA and EA, we quantified associations between maternal/infant characteristics and each outcome. A total of 82,067 infants (47,300 EA, 10,699 CA, 6,503 WA, 15,770 SA, 1,795 CCASAnet) born from 1997 to 2021 were included. Maternal antiretroviral therapy (ART) use during pregnancy ranged from 65.6% (CCASAnet) to 89.5% (EA), with improvements in all regions over time. Twenty-four-month cumulative incidences varied widely across regions, ranging from 12.3% (95% confidence limit [CL], 11.2%,13.5%) in WA to 94.8% (95% CL, 94.6%,95.1%) in EA for DNA PCR testing; 56.2% (95% CL, 55.2%,57.1%) in EA to 98.5% (95% CL, 98.3%,98.7%) in WA for LTFU; 1.9% (95% CL, 1.6%,2.3%) in WA to 10.3% (95% CL, 9.7%,10.9%) in EA for HIV diagnosis; and 0.5% (95% CL, 0.2%,1.0%) in CCASAnet to 4.7% (95% CL, 4.4%,5.0%) in EA for death. Although infant retention did not improve, HIV diagnosis and death decreased over time, and in EA, the cumulative incidence of HIV diagnosis decreased substantially, declining to 2.9% (95% CL, 1.5%,5.4%) in 2020. Maternal ART was associated with decreased infant mortality (subdistribution hazard ratio [sdHR], 0.65; 95% CL, 0.47,0.91 in EA, and sdHR, 0.51; 95% CL, 0.36,0.74 in CA) and HIV diagnosis (sdHR, 0.40; 95% CL, 0.31,0.50 in EA, and sdHR, 0.41; 95% CL, 0.31,0.54 in CA). Study limitations include potential misclassification of outcomes in real-world service delivery data and possible nonrepresentativeness of IeDEA sites and the population of HIV-exposed infants they serve. Conclusions While there was marked regional and temporal heterogeneity in clinical and programmatic outcomes, infant LTFU was high across all regions and time periods. Further efforts are needed to keep HIV-exposed infants in care to receive essential services to reduce HIV infection and mortality

Which resources should be used to identify RCT/CCTs for systematic reviews: a systematic review

BACKGROUND: Systematic reviewers seek to comprehensively search for relevant studies and summarize these to present the most valid estimate of intervention effectiveness. The more resources searched, the higher the yield, and thus time and costs required to conduct a systematic review. While there is an abundance of evidence to suggest how extensive a search for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) should be, it is neither conclusive nor consistent. This systematic review was conducted in order to assess the value of different resources to identify trials for inclusion in systematic reviews. METHODS: Seven electronic databases, four journals and Cochrane Colloquia were searched. Key authors were contacted and references of relevant articles screened. Included studies compared two or more sources to find RCTs or controlled clinical trials (CCTs). A checklist was developed and applied to assess quality of reporting. Data were extracted by one reviewer and checked by a second. Medians and ranges for precision and recall were calculated; results were grouped by comparison. Meta-analysis was not performed due to large heterogeneity. Subgroup analyses were conducted for: search strategy (Cochrane, Simple, Complex, Index), expertise of the searcher (Cochrane, librarian, non-librarian), and study design (RCT and CCT). RESULTS: Sixty-four studies representing 13 electronic databases met inclusion criteria. The most common comparisons were MEDLINE vs. handsearching (n = 23), MEDLINE vs. MEDLINE+handsearching (n = 13), and MEDLINE vs. reference standard (n = 13). Quality was low, particularly for the reporting of study selection methodology. Overall, recall and precision varied substantially by comparison and ranged from 0 to 100% and 0 to 99%, respectively. The trial registries performed the best with median recall of 89% (range 84, 95) and median precision of 96.5% (96, 97), although these results are based on a small number of studies. Inadequate or inappropriate indexing was the reason most cited for missing studies. Complex and Cochrane search strategies (SS) performed better than Simple SS. CONCLUSION: Multiple-source comprehensive searches are necessary to identify all RCTs for a systematic review, although indexing needs to be improved. Although trial registries demonstrated the highest recall and precision, the Cochrane SS or a Complex SS in consultation with a librarian are recommended. Continued efforts to develop CENTRAL should be supported

Cognitive Behavioral Therapy versus Short Psychodynamic Supportive Psychotherapy in the outpatient treatment of depression: a randomized controlled trial

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Previous research has shown that Short Psychodynamic Supportive Psychotherapy (SPSP) is an effective alternative to pharmacotherapy and combined treatment (SPSP and pharmacotherapy) in the treatment of depressed outpatients. The question remains, however, how Short Psychodynamic Supportive Psychotherapy compares with other established psychotherapy methods. The present study compares Short Psychodynamic Supportive Psychotherapy to the evidence-based Cognitive Behavioral Therapy in terms of acceptability, feasibility, and efficacy in the outpatient treatment of depression. Moreover, this study aims to identify clinical predictors that can distinguish patients who may benefit from either of these treatments in particular. This article outlines the study protocol. The results of the study, which is being currently carried out, will be presented as soon as they are available.</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p>Adult outpatients with a main diagnosis of major depressive disorder or depressive disorder not otherwise specified according to DSM-IV criteria and mild to severe depressive symptoms (<it>Hamilton Depression Rating Scale </it>score ≥ 14) are randomly allocated to Short Psychodynamic Supportive Psychotherapy or Cognitive Behavioral Therapy. Both treatments are individual psychotherapies consisting of 16 sessions within 22 weeks. Assessments take place at baseline (week 0), during the treatment period (week 5 and 10) and at treatment termination (week 22). In addition, a follow-up assessment takes place one year after treatment start (week 52). Primary outcome measures are the number of patients refusing treatment (acceptability); the number of patients terminating treatment prematurely (feasibility); and the severity of depressive symptoms (efficacy) according to an independent rater, the clinician and the patient. Secondary outcome measures include general psychopathology, general psychotherapy outcome, pain, health-related quality of life, and cost-effectiveness. Clinical predictors of treatment outcome include demographic variables, psychiatric symptoms, cognitive and psychological patient characteristics and the quality of the therapeutic relationship.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>This study evaluates Short Psychodynamic Supportive Psychotherapy as a treatment for depressed outpatients by comparing it to the established evidence-based treatment Cognitive Behavioral Therapy. Specific strengths of this study include its strong external validity and the clinical relevance of its research aims. Limitations of the study are discussed.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>Current Controlled Trails ISRCTN31263312</p

PLoS Med

BACKGROUND: The effect of antiretroviral treatment (ART) eligibility expansions on patient outcomes, including rates of timely ART initiation among those enrolling in care, has not been assessed on a large scale. In addition, it is not known whether ART eligibility expansions may lead to "crowding out" of sicker patients. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We examined changes in timely ART initiation (within 6 months) at the original site of HIV care enrollment after ART eligibility expansions among 284,740 adult ART-naive patients at 171 International Epidemiology Databases to Evaluate AIDS (IeDEA) network sites in 22 countries where national policies expanding ART eligibility were introduced between 2007 and 2015. Half of the sites included in this analysis were from Southern Africa, one-third were from East Africa, and the remainder were from the Asia-Pacific, Central Africa, North America, and South and Central America regions. The median age of patients enrolling in care at contributing sites was 33.5 years, and the median percentage of female patients at these clinics was 62.5%. We assessed the 6-month cumulative incidence of timely ART initiation (CI-ART) before and after major expansions of ART eligibility (i.e., expansion to treat persons with CD4 </= 350 cells/muL [145 sites in 22 countries] and CD4 </= 500 cells/muL [152 sites in 15 countries]). Random effects metaregression models were used to estimate absolute changes in CI-ART at each site before and after guideline expansion. The crude pooled estimate of change in CI-ART was 4.3 percentage points (95% confidence interval [CI] 2.6 to 6.1) after ART eligibility expansion to CD4 </= 350, from a baseline median CI-ART of 53%; and 15.9 percentage points (pp) (95% CI 14.3 to 17.4) after ART eligibility expansion to CD4 </= 500, from a baseline median CI-ART of 57%. The largest increases in CI-ART were observed among those newly eligible for treatment (18.2 pp after expansion to CD4 </= 350 and 47.4 pp after expansion to CD4 </= 500), with no change or small increases among those eligible under prior guidelines (CD4 </= 350: -0.6 pp, 95% CI -2.0 to 0.7 pp; CD4 </= 500: 4.9 pp, 95% CI 3.3 to 6.5 pp). For ART eligibility expansion to CD4 </= 500, changes in CI-ART were largest among younger patients (16-24 years: 21.5 pp, 95% CI 18.9 to 24.2 pp). Key limitations include the lack of a counterfactual and difficulty accounting for secular outcome trends, due to universal exposure to guideline changes in each country. CONCLUSIONS: These findings underscore the potential of ART eligibility expansion to improve the timeliness of ART initiation globally, particularly for young adults