An Intervention to Improve Mental Health and HIV Care Engagement Among Perinatal Women in Malawi: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial

Perinatal depression (PND) is common and an important barrier to engagement in HIV care for women living with HIV (WLHIV). Accordingly, we adapted and enhanced The Friendship Bench, an evidence-based counseling intervention, for perinatal WLHIV. In a pilot randomized trial (NCT04143009), we evaluated the feasibility, acceptability, fidelity, and preliminary efficacy of the Enhanced Friendship Bench (EFB) intervention to improve PND and engagement in HIV care outcomes. Eighty pregnant WLHIV who screened positive for PND symptoms on the Self-Report Questionnaire (≥ 8) were enrolled, randomized 1:1 to EFB or usual care, and followed through 6 months postpartum. Overall, 100% of intervention participants were satisfied with the intervention and 93% found it beneficial to their overall health. Of 82 counseling sessions assessed for fidelity, 83% met or exceeded the fidelity threshold. At 6 months postpartum, intervention participants had improved depression remission (59% versus 36%, RD 23%, 95% CI 2%, 45%), retention in HIV care (82% versus 69%, RD 13%, -6%, 32%), and viral suppression (96% versus 90%, RD 7%, -7%, 20%) compared to usual care. Adverse events did not differ by arm. These results suggest that EFB intervention should be evaluated in a fully powered randomized trial to evaluate its efficacy to improve PND and engagement in HIV care outcomes for WLHIV

Toward a 21st-century health care system: Recommendations for health care reform

The coverage, cost, and quality problems of the U.S. health care system are evident. Sustainable health care reform must go beyond financing expanded access to care to substantially changing the organization and delivery of care. The FRESH-Thinking Project (www.fresh-thinking.org) held a series of workshops during which physicians, health policy experts, health insurance executives, business leaders, hospital administrators, economists, and others who represent diverse perspectives came together. This group agreed that the following 8 recommendations are fundamental to successful reform: 1. Replace the current fee-for-service payment system with a payment system that encourages and rewards innovation in the efficient delivery of quality care. The new payment system should invest in the development of outcome measures to guide payment. 2. Establish a securely funded, independent agency to sponsor and evaluate research on the comparative effectiveness of drugs, devices, and other medical interventions. 3. Simplify and rationalize federal and state laws and regulations to facilitate organizational innovation, support care coordination, and streamline financial and administrative functions. 4. Develop a health information technology infrastructure with national standards of interoperability to promote data exchange. 5. Create a national health database with the participation of all payers, delivery systems, and others who own health care data. Agree on methods to make de-identified information from this database on clinical interventions, patient outcomes, and costs available to researchers. 6. Identify revenue sources, including a cap on the tax exclusion of employer-based health insurance, to subsidize health care coverage with the goal of insuring all Americans. 7. Create state or regional insurance exchanges to pool risk, so that Americans without access to employer-based or other group insurance could obtain a standard benefits package through these exchanges. Employers should also be allowed to participate in these exchanges for their employees' coverage. 8. Create a health coverage board with broad stakeholder representation to determine and periodically update the affordable standard benefit package available through state or regional insurance exchanges

Breaking the ceremonial order: patients' and doctors' accounts of removal from a general practitioner's list

The removal of patients from general practitioners' (GPs) lists in the UK offers important sociological insights into what happens when the doctor-patient relationship 'goes wrong'. An interactionist analysis shows how removers (doctors) and removed (patients) strategically invoke 'rules of conduct' to account for difficulties in the doctor-patient relationship and for GPs' decisions to end their relationships with patients. In this paper we extend this analysis through recourse to Bourdieu's theory of practice, by juxtaposing 'paired' accounts of the same removal event by both remover and removed. Our analysis demonstrates the unthinking or non-reflective nature of people's understanding of the rules governing social interactions, but also demonstrates how apparent rule violations make the rules explicit and expose patterns of power distribution. We argue that removal of patients amounts to a strategic exercise of symbolic power by GPs, and that this is experienced as an overtly violent symbolic act by patients. A theoretical reconciliation of interactionist theories of the doctor-patient relationship with Bourdieu's theory of practice is both possible and profitable, providing a micro-macro link in which issues of capital and power within the health (care) field are brought to the fore