Interventions Delivered in Clinical Settings are Effective in Reducing Risk of HIV Transmission Among People Living with HIV: Results from the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA)’s Special Projects of National Significance Initiative

To support expanded prevention services for people living with HIV, the US Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) sponsored a 5-year initiative to test whether interventions delivered in clinical settings were effective in reducing HIV transmission risk among HIV-infected patients. Across 13 demonstration sites, patients were randomized to one of four conditions. All interventions were associated with reduced unprotected vaginal and/or anal intercourse with persons of HIV-uninfected or unknown status among the 3,556 participating patients. Compared to the standard of care, patients assigned to receive interventions from medical care providers reported a significant decrease in risk after 12 months of participation. Patients receiving prevention services from health educators, social workers or paraprofessional HIV-infected peers reported significant reduction in risk at 6 months, but not at 12 months. While clinics have a choice of effective models for implementing prevention programs for their HIV-infected patients, medical provider-delivered methods are comparatively robust

Estimating the Cost of Increasing Retention in Care for HIV-Infected Patients: Results of the CDC/HRSA Retention in Care Trial

BACKGROUND: Retaining HIV patients in medical care promotes access to antiretroviral therapy, viral load suppression, and reduced HIV transmission to partners. We estimate the programmatic costs of a US multisite randomized controlled trial of an intervention to retain HIV patients in care. METHODS: Six academically affiliated HIV clinics randomized patients to intervention (enhanced personal contact with patients across time coupled with basic HIV education) and control [standard of care (SOC)] arms. Retention in care was defined as 4-month visit constancy, that is, at least 1 primary care visit in each 4-month interval over a 12-month period. We used microcosting methods to collect unit costs and measure the quantity of resources used to implement the intervention in each clinic. All fixed and variable labor and nonlabor costs of the intervention were included. RESULTS: Visit constancy was achieved by 45.7% (280/613) of patients in the SOC arm and by 55.8% (343/615) of patients in the intervention arm, representing an increase of 63 patients (relative improvement 22.1%; 95% confidence interval: 9% to 36%; P <0.01). The total annual cost of the intervention at the 6 clinics was $241,565, the average cost per patient was$393, and the estimated cost per additional patient retained in care beyond SOC was $3834. CONCLUSIONS: Our analyses showed that a retention in care intervention consisting of enhanced personal contact coupled with basic HIV education may be delivered at fairly low cost. These results provide useful information for guiding decisions about planning or scaling-up retention in care interventions for HIV-infected patients

Interventions delivered in clinical settings are effective in reducing risk of HIV transmission among people living with HIV: results from the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA)'s Special Projects of National Significance initiative.

To support expanded prevention services for people living with HIV, the US Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) sponsored a 5-year initiative to test whether interventions delivered in clinical settings were effective in reducing HIV transmission risk among HIV-infected patients. Across 13 demonstration sites, patients were randomized to one of four conditions. All interventions were associated with reduced unprotected vaginal and/or anal intercourse with persons of HIV-uninfected or unknown status among the 3,556 participating patients. Compared to the standard of care, patients assigned to receive interventions from medical care providers reported a significant decrease in risk after 12 months of participation. Patients receiving prevention services from health educators, social workers or paraprofessional HIV-infected peers reported significant reduction in risk at 6 months, but not at 12 months. While clinics have a choice of effective models for implementing prevention programs for their HIV-infected patients, medical provider-delivered methods are comparatively robust

The Contribution of Missed Clinic Visits to Disparities in HIV Viral Load Outcomes

We explored the contribution of missed primary HIV care visits ("no-show") to observed disparities in virological failure (VF) among Black persons and persons with injection drug use (IDU) history. We used patient-level data from 6 academic clinics, before the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and Health Resources and Services Administration Retention in Care intervention. We employed staged multivariable logistic regression and multivariable models stratified by no-show visit frequency to evaluate the association of sociodemographic factors with VF. We used multiple imputations to assign missing viral load values. Among 10 053 patients (mean age = 46 years; 35% female; 64% Black; 15% with IDU history), 31% experienced VF. Although Black patients and patients with IDU history were significantly more likely to experience VF in initial analyses, race and IDU parameter estimates were attenuated after sequential addition of no-show frequency. In stratified models, race and IDU were not statistically significantly associated with VF at any no-show level. Because missed clinic visits contributed to observed differences in viral load outcomes among Black and IDU patients, achieving an improved understanding of differential visit attendance is imperative to reducing disparities in HIV

The Association of Clinical Follow-Up Intervals in HIV-Infected Persons with Viral Suppression on Subsequent Viral Suppression

The recommendation for the frequency for routine clinical monitoring of persons with well-controlled HIV infection is based on evidence that relies on observed rather than intended follow-up intervals. We sought to determine if the scheduled follow-up interval is associated with subsequent virologic failure. Participants in this 6-clinic retrospective cohort study had an index clinic visit in 2008 and HIV viral load (VL) ≤400 c/mL. Univariate and multivariate tests evaluated if scheduling the next follow-up appointment at 3, 4, or 6 months predicted VL >400 c/mL at 12 months (VF). Among 2171 participants, 66%, 26%, and 8% were scheduled next follow-up visits at 3, 4, and 6 months, respectively. With missing 12-month VL considered VF, 25%, 25%, and 24% of persons scheduled at 3, 4, and 6 months had VF, respectively ( p =0.95). Excluding persons with missing 12-month VL, 7.1%, 5.7%, and 4.5% had VF, respectively ( p =0.35). Multivariable models yielded nonsignificant odds of VF by scheduled follow-up interval both when missing 12-month VL were considered VF and when persons with missing 12-month VL were excluded. We conclude that clinicians are able to make safe decisions extending follow-up intervals in persons with viral suppression, at least in the short-term

A Low-Effort, Clinic-Wide Intervention Improves Attendance for HIV Primary Care

Data from 6 human immunodeficiency virus clinics showed improvements in clinic attendance after versus before a clinic-wide intervention (7% on short-term measure; 3% on longer-term measure). Several subgroups showed larger improvements: younger patients, new or reengaging patients, and patients with elevated viral loads. Background.  Retention in care for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)–infected patients is a National HIV/AIDS Strategy priority. We hypothesized that retention could be improved with coordinated messages to encourage patients' clinic attendance. We report here the results of the first phase of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention/Health Resources and Services Administration Retention in Care project. Methods.  Six HIV-specialty clinics participated in a cross-sectionally sampled pretest-posttest evaluation of brochures, posters, and messages that conveyed the importance of regular clinic attendance. 10 018 patients in 2008–2009 (preintervention period) and 11 039 patients in 2009–2010 (intervention period) were followed up for clinic attendance. Outcome variables were the percentage of patients who kept 2 consecutive primary care visits and the mean proportion of all primary care visits kept. Stratification variables were: new, reengaging, and active patients, HIV RNA viral load, CD4 cell count, age, sex, race or ethnicity, risk group, number of scheduled visits, and clinic site. Data were analyzed by multivariable log-binomial and linear models using generalized estimation equation methods. Results.  Clinic attendance for primary care was significantly higher in the intervention versus preintervention year. Overall relative improvement was 7.0% for keeping 2 consecutive visits and 3.0% for the mean proportion of all visits kept ( P  < .0001). Larger relative improvement for both outcomes was observed for new or reengaging patients, young patients and patients with elevated viral loads. Improved attendance among the new or reengaging patients was consistent across the 6 clinics, and less consistent across clinics for active patients. Conclusion.  Targeted messages on staying in care, which were delivered at minimal effort and cost, improved clinic attendance, especially for new or reengaging patients, young patients, and those with elevated viral loads