19 research outputs found

    ¿Cuáles son los derechos que deben ser protegidos por el amparo contra resoluciones judiciales?

    No full text
    En el presente trabajo se ha realizado un análisis del proceso de amparo, el amparo contra resoluciones judiciales, el concepto de procedimiento regular. Todo ello a fin de establecer cuales son los derechos que se deben de proteger mediante el proceso de amparo contra resoluciones judiciales. Ello debido a que existe una controversia de si deben de ser protegidos todos los derechos, o, únicamente los derechos procesales. La línea de argumentación del presente trabajo arribó a la conclusión de que deben de ser únicamente estos últimos.In this paper, an analysis of the protection process, protection against judicial resolutions, and the concept of regular procedure has been carried out. All of this to establish which rights must be protected through the protection process against judicial resolutions. This is because there is a controversy as to whether all rights should be protected, or only procedural rights. The line of argument of the present work concluded that it must be only the latter.Trabajo académic

    Challenges and Barriers to HIV Care for Mexican Born Men Living in Chicago

    No full text
    Background: Latinx men are disproportionately impacted by HIV. Research often looks at Latinx people as a heterogeneous population. This paper describes baseline characteristics and barriers to HIV care among Mexican born men enrolled in an HIV care engagement intervention at a public health clinic in Chicago. Methods: Survey and medical chart data were collected. Results: 66 Mexican born men enrolled in the project. Over half (60%) were newly diagnosed; 40% were reengaging in care or establishing care for the first time. Participants reported significant pre and postmigration concerns including poverty, social stigma, late entry to care, and concurrent health concerns, including 47% screening positive for depression. Barriers to care and mental health concerns were significantly related to Stage 3 HIV. Discussion: More prevention and intervention research is needed to ameliorate the negative socioeconomic and health ramifications of immigration and bolster mental and sexual health, reduce HIV transmission, and increase testing, linkage and care retention

    Associations between fentanyl use and initiation, persistence, and retention on medications for opioid use disorder among people living with uncontrolled HIV disease

    No full text
    Associations between fentanyl use and initiation and retention on medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) are poorly understood. Data were from a multisite clinical trial comparing extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX) with treatment as usual (TAU; buprenorphine or methadone) to achieve HIV viral suppression among people with OUD and uncontrolled HIV disease. The exposure of interest was fentanyl use, as measured by urine drug screening. Outcomes were time to MOUD initiation, defined as date of first injection of XR-NTX, buprenorphine prescription, or methadone administration; MOUD persistence, the total number of injections, prescriptions, or administrations received over 24 weeks; and MOUD retention, having an injection, prescription, or administration during weeks 20–24. Participants (N = 111) averaged 47 years old and 62% were male. Just over half (57%) were Black and 13% were Hispanic. Sixty-four percent of participants tested positive for fentanyl at baseline. Participants with baseline fentanyl positivity were 11 times less likely to initiate XR-NTX than those negative for fentanyl (aHR = 0.09, 95% CI 0.03–0.24, p < .001), but there was no evidence that fentanyl use impacted the likelihood of TAU initiation (aHR = 1.50, 0.67–3.36, p = .323). Baseline fentanyl use was not associated with persistence or retention on any MOUD. Fentanyl use was a substantial barrier to XR-NTX initiation for the treatment of OUD in persons with uncontrolled HIV infection. There was no evidence that fentanyl use impacted partial/full agonist initiation and, once initiated, retention on any MOUD. •Fentanyl use decreases extended-release naltrexone initiation.•Fentanyl use may not affect buprenorphine or methadone initiation.•Fentanyl use may not affect retention on medication for opioid use disorder

    Feasibility and safety of extended-release naltrexone treatment of opioid and alcohol use disorder in HIV clinics: a pilot/feasibility randomized trial.

    No full text
    Background and aimsHIV-infected people with substance use disorders are least likely to benefit from advances in HIV treatment. Integration of extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX) into HIV clinics may increase engagement in the HIV care continuum by decreasing substance use. We aimed to compare (1) XR-NTX treatment initiation, (2) retention and (3) safety of XR-NTX versus treatment as usual (TAU) for treating opioid use disorder (OUD) and/or alcohol use disorder (AUD) in HIV clinics.DesignNon-blinded randomized trial of XR-NTX versus pharmacotherapy TAU.SettingHIV primary care clinics in Vancouver, BC, Canada and Chicago, IL, USA.ParticipantsFifty-one HIV-infected patients seeking treatment for OUD (n = 16), AUD (n = 27) or both OUD and AUD (n = 8).MeasurementsPrimary outcomes were XR-NTX initiation (receipt of first injection within 4 weeks of randomization) and retention at 16 weeks. Secondary outcomes generated point estimates for change in substance use, HIV viral suppression [HIV RNA polymerase chain reaction (pcr) &lt; 200 copies/ml] and safety.FindingsTwo-thirds (68%) of participants assigned to XR-NTX initiated treatment, and 88% of these were retained on XR-NTX at 16 weeks. In comparison, 96% of TAU participants initiated treatment, but only 50% were retained on medication at 16 weeks. Mean days of opioid use in past 30 days decreased from 17.3 to 4.1 for TAU and from 20.3 to 7.7 for XR-NTX. Mean heavy drinking days decreased from 15.6 to 5.7 for TAU and 12.5 to 2.8 for XR-NTX. Among those with OUD, HIV suppression improved from 67 to 80% for XR-NTX and 58 to 75% for TAU. XR-NTX was well tolerated, with no precipitated withdrawals and one serious injection-site reaction.ConclusionsExtended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX) is feasible and safe for treatment of opioid use disorder and alcohol use disorder in HIV clinics. Treatment initiation appears to be lower and retention greater for XR-NTX compared with treatment as usual (clinicaltrials.gov NCT01908062)

    HIV clinic-based extended-release naltrexone versus treatment as usual for people with HIV and opioid use disorder: a non-blinded, randomized non-inferiority trial.

    No full text
    BACKGROUND AND AIM: Opioid agonist medications for treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD) can improve human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) outcomes and reduce opioid use. We tested whether outpatient antagonist treatment with naltrexone could achieve similar results. DESIGN: Open-label, non-inferiority randomized trial. Setting was six US HIV primary care clinics. A total of 114 participants with untreated HIV and OUD (62% male; 56% black, 12% Hispanic; positive for fentanyl (62%), other opioids (47%) and cocaine (60%) at baseline). Enrollment halted early due to slow recruitment. INTERVENTION: HIV clinic-based extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX; n = 55) versus treatment as usual (TAU) with buprenorphine or methadone (TAU; n = 59). MEASUREMENTS: Treatment group differences were compared for the primary outcome of viral suppression (HIV RNA ≤ 200 copies/ml) at 24 weeks and secondary outcomes included past 30-day use of opioids at 24 weeks. FINDINGS: Fewer XR-NTX participants initiated medication compared with TAU participants (47 versus 73%). The primary outcome of viral suppression was comparable for XR-NTX (52.7%) and TAU (49.2%) at 24 weeks. Non-inferiority could not be demonstrated, as the lower confidence limit of the RR did not exceed the pre-specified margin of 0.75 in intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis. The main secondary outcome of past 30-day opioid use was comparable for XR-NTX versus TAU in ITT analysis. Among those initiating medication, XR-NTX resulted in fewer days of opioid use compared with TAU in the past 30 days. CONCLUSIONS: A randomized controlled trial found supportive, but not conclusive, evidence that human immunodeficiency virus clinic-based extended-release naltrexone is not inferior to treatment as usual for facilitating human immunodeficiency virus viral suppression. Participants who initiated extended-release naltrexone used fewer opioids than those who received treatment as usual

    Effect of Patient Navigation With or Without Financial Incentives on Viral Suppression Among Hospitalized Patients With HIV Infection and Substance Use: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

    No full text
    ImportanceSubstance use is a major driver of the HIV epidemic and is associated with poor HIV care outcomes. Patient navigation (care coordination with case management) and the use of financial incentives for achieving predetermined outcomes are interventions increasingly promoted to engage patients in substance use disorders treatment and HIV care, but there is little evidence for their efficacy in improving HIV-1 viral suppression rates.ObjectiveTo assess the effect of a structured patient navigation intervention with or without financial incentives to improve HIV-1 viral suppression rates among patients with elevated HIV-1 viral loads and substance use recruited as hospital inpatients.Design, setting, and participantsFrom July 2012 through January 2014, 801 patients with HIV infection and substance use from 11 hospitals across the United States were randomly assigned to receive patient navigation alone (n = 266), patient navigation plus financial incentives (n = 271), or treatment as usual (n = 264). HIV-1 plasma viral load was measured at baseline and at 6 and 12 months.InterventionsPatient navigation included up to 11 sessions of care coordination with case management and motivational interviewing techniques over 6 months. Financial incentives (up to $1160) were provided for achieving targeted behaviors aimed at reducing substance use, increasing engagement in HIV care, and improving HIV outcomes. Treatment as usual was the standard practice at each hospital for linking hospitalized patients to outpatient HIV care and substance use disorders treatment.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was HIV viral suppression (≤200 copies/mL) relative to viral nonsuppression or death at the 12-month follow-up.ResultsOf 801 patients randomized, 261 (32.6%) were women (mean [SD] age, 44.6 years [10.0 years]). There were no differences in rates of HIV viral suppression versus nonsuppression or death among the 3 groups at 12 months. Eighty-five of 249 patients (34.1%) in the usual-treatment group experienced treatment success compared with 89 of 249 patients (35.7%) in the navigation-only group for a treatment difference of 1.6% (95% CI, -6.8% to 10.0%; P = .80) and compared with 98 of 254 patients (38.6%) in the navigation-plus-incentives group for a treatment difference of 4.5% (95% CI -4.0% to 12.8%; P = .68). The treatment difference between the navigation-only and the navigation-plus-incentives group was -2.8% (95% CI, -11.3% to 5.6%; P = .68).Conclusions and relevanceAmong hospitalized patients with HIV infection and substance use, patient navigation with or without financial incentives did not have a beneficial effect on HIV viral suppression relative to nonsuppression or death at 12 months vs treatment as usual. These findings do not support these interventions in this setting.Trial registrationclinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01612169
    corecore