The Health Resources and Services Administration's Ryan White HIV/AIDS Program in rural areas of the United States: Geographic distribution, provider characteristics, and clinical outcomes.

BACKGROUND:People living with HIV (PLWH) residing in rural areas experience substantial barriers to HIV care, which may contribute to poor HIV health outcomes, including retention in HIV care and viral suppression. The Health Resources and Services Administration's Ryan White HIV/AIDS Program (HRSA RWHAP) is an important source of HIV medical care and support services in rural areas. The purpose of this analysis was to (1) assess the reach of the RWHAP in rural areas of the United States, (2) compare the characteristics and funded services of RWHAP provider organizations in rural and non-rural areas, and (3) compare the characteristics and clinical outcomes of RWHAP clients accessing medical care and support services in rural and non-rural areas. METHODS AND FINDINGS:Data for this analysis were abstracted from the 2017 RWHAP Services Report (RSR), the primary source of annual, client-level RWHAP data. Organizations funded to deliver RWHAP any service ("RWHAP providers") were categorized as rural or non-rural according to the HRSA FORHP's definition of modified Rural-Urban Commuting Area (RUCA) codes. RWHAP clients were categorized based on their patterns of RWHAP service use as "visited only rural providers," "visited only non-rural providers," or "visited rural and non-rural providers." In 2017, among the 2,113 providers funded by the RWHAP, 6.2% (n = 132) were located in HRSA-designated rural areas. Rural providers were funded to deliver a greater number of service categories per site than non-rural providers (44.7% funded for ≥5 services vs. 34.1% funded for ≥5 services, respectively). Providers in rural areas served fewer clients than providers in non-rural areas; 47.3% of RWHAP providers in rural areas served 1-99 clients, while 29.6% of non-rural providers served 1-99 clients. Retention in care and viral suppression outcomes did not differ on the basis of whether a client accessed services from rural or non-rural providers. CONCLUSIONS:RWHAP providers are a crucial component of HIV care delivery in the rural United States despite evidence of significant barriers to engagement in care for rural PLWH, RWHAP clients who visited rural providers were just as likely to be retained in care and reach viral suppression as their counterparts who visited non-rural providers. The RWHAP, especially in partnership with Rural Health Clinics and federally funded Health Centers, has the infrastructure and expertise necessary to address the HIV epidemic in rural America

Combining mHealth Technology and Pharmacotherapy to Improve Mental Health Outcomes and Reduce Human Rights Abuses in West Africa: Intervention Field Trial

Abstract BackgroundIn West Africa, healers greatly outnumber trained mental health professionals. People with serious mental illness (SMI) are often seen by healers in “prayer camps” where they may also experience human rights abuses. We developed “M&M,” an 8-week-long dual-pronged intervention involving (1) a smartphone-delivered toolkit designed to expose healers to brief psychosocial interventions and encourage them to preserve human rights (M-Healer app), and (2) a visiting nurse who provides medications to their patients (Mobile Nurse). ObjectiveWe examined the feasibility, acceptability, safety, and preliminary effectiveness of the M&M intervention in real-world prayer camp settings. MethodsWe conducted a single-arm field trial of M&M with people with SMI and healers at a prayer camp in Ghana. Healers were provided smartphones with M-Healer installed and were trained by practice facilitators to use the digital toolkit. In parallel, a study nurse visited their prayer camp to administer medications to their patients. Clinical assessors administered study measures to participants with SMI at pretreatment (baseline), midtreatment (4 weeks) and post treatment (8 weeks). ResultsSeventeen participants were enrolled and most (n=15, 88.3%) were retained. Participants had an average age of 44.3 (SD 13.9) years and 59% (n=10) of them were male. Fourteen (82%) participants had a diagnosis of schizophrenia and 2 (18%) were diagnosed with bipolar disorder. Four healers were trained to use M-Healer. On average, they self-initiated app use 31.9 (SD 28.9) times per week. Healers watched an average of 19.1 (SD 21.2) videos, responded to 1.5 (SD 2.4) prompts, and used the app for 5.3 (SD 2.7) days weekly. Pre-post analyses revealed a significant and clinically meaningful reduction in psychiatric symptom severity (Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale score range 52.3 to 30.9; Brief Symptom Inventory score range 76.4 to 27.9), psychological distress (Talbieh Brief Distress Inventory score range 37.7 to 16.9), shame (Other as Shamer Scale score range 41.9 to 28.5), and stigma (Brief Internalized Stigma of Mental Illness Scale score range 11.8 to 10.3). We recorded a significant reduction in days chained (1.6 to 0.5) and a promising trend for reduction in the days of forced fasting (2.6 to 0.0, P ConclusionsThe M&M intervention proved to be feasible, acceptable, safe, and clinically promising. Preliminary findings suggest that the M-Healer toolkit may have shifted healers’ behaviors at the prayer camp so that they commit fewer human rights abuses

Characteristics and outcomes of COVID-19 patients admitted to hospital with and without respiratory symptoms

Background: COVID-19 is primarily known as a respiratory illness; however, many patients present to hospital without respiratory symptoms. The association between non-respiratory presentations of COVID-19 and outcomes remains unclear. We investigated risk factors and clinical outcomes in patients with no respiratory symptoms (NRS) and respiratory symptoms (RS) at hospital admission. Methods: This study describes clinical features, physiological parameters, and outcomes of hospitalised COVID-19 patients, stratified by the presence or absence of respiratory symptoms at hospital admission. RS patients had one or more of: cough, shortness of breath, sore throat, runny nose or wheezing; while NRS patients did not. Results: Of 178,640 patients in the study, 86.4 % presented with RS, while 13.6 % had NRS. NRS patients were older (median age: NRS: 74 vs RS: 65) and less likely to be admitted to the ICU (NRS: 36.7 % vs RS: 37.5 %). NRS patients had a higher crude in-hospital case-fatality ratio (NRS 41.1 % vs. RS 32.0 %), but a lower risk of death after adjusting for confounders (HR 0.88 [0.83-0.93]). Conclusion: Approximately one in seven COVID-19 patients presented at hospital admission without respiratory symptoms. These patients were older, had lower ICU admission rates, and had a lower risk of in-hospital mortality after adjusting for confounders