The British HIV Association national clinical audit 2021: Management of HIV and hepatitis C coinfection

Objectives: We aimed to describe clinical policies for the management of people with HIV/hepatitis C virus (HCV) coinfection and to audit routine monitoring and assessment of people with HIV/HCV coinfection attending UK HIV care. Methods: This was a clinic survey and retrospective case-note review. HIV clinics in the UK participated in the audit from May to July 2021 by completing an online questionnaire regarding their clinic's policies for the management of people with HIV/HCV coinfection, and by contributing to a case-note review of people living with HIV with detectable HCV RNA who were under the care of their service. Results: Ninety-five clinics participated in the clinic survey; of these, 15 (15.8%) were regional specialist centres, 19 (20.0%) were HIV services with their own coinfection clinics, 40 (42.1%) were HIV services that referred coinfected individuals to a local hepatology service and 20 (21.1%) were HIV services that referred to a regional specialist centre. Eighty-one clinics provided full caseload estimates; of the approximately 3951 people with a history of HIV/HCV coinfection accessing their clinics, only 4.9% were believed to have detectable HCV RNA, 3.15% of whom were already receiving or approved for direct-acting antiviral (DAA) treatment. In total, 29 (30.5%) of the clinics reported an impact of COVID-19 on coinfection care, including delays or reductions in the frequency of services, monitoring, treatment initiation and appointments, and changes to the way that treatment was dispensed. Case-note reviews were provided for 283 people with detectable HCV RNA from 74 clinics (median age 42 years, 74.6% male, 56.2% HCV genotype 1, 22.3% HCV genotype 3). Overall, 56% had not received treatment for HCV, primarily due to lack of engagement in care (54.7%) and/or being uncontactable (16.4%). Conclusions: Our findings show that the small number of people with HIV with detectable HCV RNA in the UK should mean that it is possible to achieve HCV micro-elimination. However, more work is needed to improve engagement in care for those who are untreated for HCV

The INCLUDE study: INtegrating and improving Care for patients with infLammatory rheUmatological DisordErs in the community; identifying multimorbidity: Protocol for a pilot randomized controlled trial.

Background: Patients with inflammatory rheumatic conditions such as rheumatoid arthritis, polymyalgia rheumatica and ankylosing spondylitis are at increased risk of common comorbidities such as cardiovascular disease, osteoporosis and anxiety and depression which lead to increased morbidity and mortality. These associated morbidities are often un-recognized and under-treated. While patients with other long-term conditions such as diabetes are invited for routine reviews in primary care, which may include identification and management of co-morbidities, at present this does not occur for patients with inflammatory conditions, and thus, opportunities to diagnose and optimally manage these comorbidities are missed. Objective: To evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of a nurse-led integrated care review (the INtegrating and improving Care for patients with infLammatory rheUmatological DisordErs in the community (INCLUDE) review) for people with inflammatory rheumatological conditions in primary care. Design: A pilot cluster randomized controlled trial will be undertaken to test the feasibility and acceptability of a nurse-led integrated primary care review for identification, assessment and initial management of common comorbidities including cardiovascular disease, osteoporosis and anxiety and depression. A process evaluation will be undertaken using a mixed methods approach including participant self-reported questionnaires, a medical record review, an INCLUDE EMIS template, intervention fidelity checking using audio-recordings of the INCLUDE review consultation and qualitative interviews with patient participants, study nurses and study general practitioners (GPs). Discussion: Success of the pilot study will be measured against the engagement, recruitment and study retention rates of both general practices and participants. Acceptability of the INCLUDE review to patients and practitioners and treatment fidelity will be explored using a parallel process evaluation. Trial Registration: ISRCTN12765345

A unified machine learning approach to time series forecasting applied to demand at emergency departments

There were 25.6 million attendances at Emergency Departments (EDs) in England in 2019 corresponding to an increase of 12 million attendances over the past ten years. The steadily rising demand at EDs creates a constant challenge to provide adequate quality of care while maintaining standards and productivity. Managing hospital demand effectively requires an adequate knowledge of the future rate of admission. Using 8 years of electronic admissions data from two major acute care hospitals in London, we develop a novel ensemble methodology that combines the outcomes of the best performing time series and machine learning approaches in order to make highly accurate forecasts of demand, 1, 3 and 7 days in the future. Both hospitals face an average daily demand of 208 and 106 attendances respectively and experience considerable volatility around this mean. However, our approach is able to predict attendances at these emergency departments one day in advance up to a mean absolute error of +/- 14 and +/- 10 patients corresponding to a mean absolute percentage error of 6.8% and 8.6% respectively. Our analysis compares machine learning algorithms to more traditional linear models. We find that linear models often outperform machine learning methods and that the quality of our predictions for any of the forecasting horizons of 1, 3 or 7 days are comparable as measured in MAE. In addition to comparing and combining state-of-the-art forecasting methods to predict hospital demand, we consider two different hyperparameter tuning methods, enabling a faster deployment of our models without compromising performance. We believe our framework can readily be used to forecast a wide range of policy relevant indicators

Physiology as a tool for at-risk animal recovery planning: An analysis of Canadian recovery strategies with global recommendations

Many government organizations use recovery planning to synthesize threats, propose management strategies, and determine recovery criteria for threatened wildlife. Little is known about the extent to which physiological knowledge has been used in recovery planning, despite its potential to offer key biological information that could aid in recovery success. Using recovery strategies for at-risk animal species in Canada as a case study, we analyzed the prevalence, purpose, and type of physiological knowledge being used in recovery planning. We found that 73% of strategies contained mention of physiology and that incorporation of physiology has increased since 2006. Of the various types of physiological tools available, reference to stress, immune, thermal, and bioenergetic metrics appeared most frequently. Physiological information was more likely to be found in the background and threat assessment sections compared to action and future research sections, and less likely to be included in strategies for arthropods and birds compared to other taxonomic groups. By synthesizing our results with previous studies, we provide recommendations to encourage the application of physiological tools in recovery planning worldwide, such as increased incorporation of physiology in ongoing threat monitoring, critical habitat assessments, monitoring the success of recovery actions, and modeling responses to future environmental changes.publishedVersio

Renal impairment in a rural African antiretroviral programme

Background: There is little knowledge regarding the prevalence and nature of renal impairment in African populations initiating antiretroviral treatment, nor evidence to inform the most cost effective methods of screening for renal impairment. With the increasing availability of the potentially nephrotixic drug, tenofovir, such information is important for the planning of antiretroviral programmes Methods: (i) Retrospective review of the prevalence and risk factors for impaired renal function in 2189 individuals initiating antiretroviral treatment in a rural African setting between 2004 and 2007 (ii) A prospective study of 149 consecutive patients initiating antiretrovirals to assess the utility of urine analysis for the detection of impaired renal function. Severe renal and moderately impaired renal function were defined as an estimated GFR of ≤ 30 mls/min/1.73 m2 and 30–60 mls/min/1.73 m2 respectively. Logistic regression was used to determine odds ratio (OR) of significantly impaired renal function (combining severe and moderate impairment). Co-variates for analysis were age, sex and CD4 count at initiation. Results: (i) There was a low prevalence of severe renal impairment (29/2189, 1.3% 95% C.I. 0.8–1.8) whereas moderate renal impairment was more frequent (287/2189, 13.1% 95% C.I. 11.6–14.5) with many patients having advanced immunosuppression at treatment initiation (median CD4 120 cells/μl). In multivariable logistic regression age over 40 (aOR 4.65, 95% C.I. 3.54–6.1), male gender (aOR 1.89, 95% C.I. 1.39–2.56) and CD4<100 cells/ul (aOR 1.4, 95% C.I. 1.07–1.82) were associated with risk of significant renal impairment (ii) In 149 consecutive patients, urine analysis had poor sensitivity and specificity for detecting impaired renal function. Conclusion: In this rural African setting, significant renal impairment is uncommon in patients initiating antiretrovirals. Urine analysis alone may be inadequate for identification of those with impaired renal function where resources for biochemistry are limited

Need for timely paediatric HIV treatment within primary health care in rural South Africa

&lt;p&gt;Background: In areas where adult HIV prevalence has reached hyperendemic levels, many infants remain at risk of acquiring HIV infection. Timely access to care and treatment for HIV-infected infants and young children remains an important challenge. We explore the extent to which public sector roll-out has met the estimated need for paediatric treatment in a rural South African setting.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;Methods: Local facility and population-based data were used to compare the number of HIV infected children accessing HAART before 2008, with estimates of those in need of treatment from a deterministic modeling approach. The impact of programmatic improvements on estimated numbers of children in need of treatment was assessed in sensitivity analyses.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;Findings: In the primary health care programme of HIV treatment 346 children &#60;16 years of age initiated HAART by 2008; 245(70.8%) were aged 10 years or younger, and only 2(&#60;1%) under one year of age. Deterministic modeling predicted 2,561 HIV infected children aged 10 or younger to be alive within the area, of whom at least 521(20.3%) would have required immediate treatment. Were extended PMTCT uptake to reach 100% coverage, the annual number of infected infants could be reduced by 49.2%.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;Conclusion: Despite progress in delivering decentralized HIV services to a rural sub-district in South Africa, substantial unmet need for treatment remains. In a local setting, very few children were initiated on treatment under 1 year of age and steps have now been taken to successfully improve early diagnosis and referral of infected infants.&lt;/p&gt

Decision criteria for selecting essential medicines and their connection to guidelines:an interpretive descriptive qualitative interview study

Background and Objectives: The World Health Organization Model List of Essential Medicines has led to at least 137 national lists. Essential medicines should be grounded in evidence-based guideline recommendations and explicit decision criteria. Essential medicines should be available, accessible, affordable, and the supporting evidence should be accompanied by a rating of the certainty one can place in it. Our objectives were to identify criteria and considerations that should be addressed in moving from a guideline recommendation regarding a medicine to the decision of whether to add, maintain, or remove a medicine from an essential medicines list. We also seek to explore opportunities to improve organizational processes to support evidence-based health decision-making more broadly. Methods: We conducted a qualitative study with semistructured interviews of key informant stakeholders in the development and use of guidelines and essential medicine lists (EMLs). We used an interpretive descriptive analysis approach and thematic analysis of interview transcripts in NVIVO v12. Results: We interviewed 16 key informants working at national and global levels across all WHO regions. We identified five themes: three descriptive/explanatory themes 1) EMLs and guidelines, the same, but different; 2) EMLs can drive price reductions and improve affordability and access; 3) Time lag and disconnect between guidelines and EMLs; and two prescriptive themes 4) An “evidence pipeline” could improve coordination between guidelines and EMLs; 5) Facilitating the link between the WHO Model List of Essential Medicines (WHO EML) and national EMLs could increase alignment. Conclusion: We found significant overlap and opportunities for alignment between guideline and essential medicine decision processes. This finding presents opportunities for guideline and EML developers to enhance strategies for collaboration. Future research should assess and evaluate these strategies in practice to support the shared goal of guidelines and EMLs: improvements in health.</p

Decision criteria for selecting essential medicines and their connection to guidelines:an interpretive descriptive qualitative interview study

Background and Objectives: The World Health Organization Model List of Essential Medicines has led to at least 137 national lists. Essential medicines should be grounded in evidence-based guideline recommendations and explicit decision criteria. Essential medicines should be available, accessible, affordable, and the supporting evidence should be accompanied by a rating of the certainty one can place in it. Our objectives were to identify criteria and considerations that should be addressed in moving from a guideline recommendation regarding a medicine to the decision of whether to add, maintain, or remove a medicine from an essential medicines list. We also seek to explore opportunities to improve organizational processes to support evidence-based health decision-making more broadly. Methods: We conducted a qualitative study with semistructured interviews of key informant stakeholders in the development and use of guidelines and essential medicine lists (EMLs). We used an interpretive descriptive analysis approach and thematic analysis of interview transcripts in NVIVO v12. Results: We interviewed 16 key informants working at national and global levels across all WHO regions. We identified five themes: three descriptive/explanatory themes 1) EMLs and guidelines, the same, but different; 2) EMLs can drive price reductions and improve affordability and access; 3) Time lag and disconnect between guidelines and EMLs; and two prescriptive themes 4) An “evidence pipeline” could improve coordination between guidelines and EMLs; 5) Facilitating the link between the WHO Model List of Essential Medicines (WHO EML) and national EMLs could increase alignment. Conclusion: We found significant overlap and opportunities for alignment between guideline and essential medicine decision processes. This finding presents opportunities for guideline and EML developers to enhance strategies for collaboration. Future research should assess and evaluate these strategies in practice to support the shared goal of guidelines and EMLs: improvements in health.</p

Decision criteria for selecting essential medicines and their connection to guidelines:an interpretive descriptive qualitative interview study

Background and Objectives: The World Health Organization Model List of Essential Medicines has led to at least 137 national lists. Essential medicines should be grounded in evidence-based guideline recommendations and explicit decision criteria. Essential medicines should be available, accessible, affordable, and the supporting evidence should be accompanied by a rating of the certainty one can place in it. Our objectives were to identify criteria and considerations that should be addressed in moving from a guideline recommendation regarding a medicine to the decision of whether to add, maintain, or remove a medicine from an essential medicines list. We also seek to explore opportunities to improve organizational processes to support evidence-based health decision-making more broadly. Methods: We conducted a qualitative study with semistructured interviews of key informant stakeholders in the development and use of guidelines and essential medicine lists (EMLs). We used an interpretive descriptive analysis approach and thematic analysis of interview transcripts in NVIVO v12. Results: We interviewed 16 key informants working at national and global levels across all WHO regions. We identified five themes: three descriptive/explanatory themes 1) EMLs and guidelines, the same, but different; 2) EMLs can drive price reductions and improve affordability and access; 3) Time lag and disconnect between guidelines and EMLs; and two prescriptive themes 4) An “evidence pipeline” could improve coordination between guidelines and EMLs; 5) Facilitating the link between the WHO Model List of Essential Medicines (WHO EML) and national EMLs could increase alignment. Conclusion: We found significant overlap and opportunities for alignment between guideline and essential medicine decision processes. This finding presents opportunities for guideline and EML developers to enhance strategies for collaboration. Future research should assess and evaluate these strategies in practice to support the shared goal of guidelines and EMLs: improvements in health.</p

Decision criteria for selecting essential medicines and their connection to guidelines:an interpretive descriptive qualitative interview study

Background and Objectives: The World Health Organization Model List of Essential Medicines has led to at least 137 national lists. Essential medicines should be grounded in evidence-based guideline recommendations and explicit decision criteria. Essential medicines should be available, accessible, affordable, and the supporting evidence should be accompanied by a rating of the certainty one can place in it. Our objectives were to identify criteria and considerations that should be addressed in moving from a guideline recommendation regarding a medicine to the decision of whether to add, maintain, or remove a medicine from an essential medicines list. We also seek to explore opportunities to improve organizational processes to support evidence-based health decision-making more broadly. Methods: We conducted a qualitative study with semistructured interviews of key informant stakeholders in the development and use of guidelines and essential medicine lists (EMLs). We used an interpretive descriptive analysis approach and thematic analysis of interview transcripts in NVIVO v12. Results: We interviewed 16 key informants working at national and global levels across all WHO regions. We identified five themes: three descriptive/explanatory themes 1) EMLs and guidelines, the same, but different; 2) EMLs can drive price reductions and improve affordability and access; 3) Time lag and disconnect between guidelines and EMLs; and two prescriptive themes 4) An “evidence pipeline” could improve coordination between guidelines and EMLs; 5) Facilitating the link between the WHO Model List of Essential Medicines (WHO EML) and national EMLs could increase alignment. Conclusion: We found significant overlap and opportunities for alignment between guideline and essential medicine decision processes. This finding presents opportunities for guideline and EML developers to enhance strategies for collaboration. Future research should assess and evaluate these strategies in practice to support the shared goal of guidelines and EMLs: improvements in health.</p