Effect and implementation experience of intensive adherence counseling in a public HIV care center in Uganda: a mixed-methods study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Intensive adherence counseling (IAC) is an intervention recommended by the World Health Organization to improve anti-retroviral therapy (ART) adherence among people living with HIV on ART with unsuppressed viral load; and in 2016, the intervention was implemented in Uganda. This study evaluated the effect and experiences of providing IAC in an urban HIV care center in Kampala, Uganda. METHODS: This was a sequential explanatory mixed-method study that compared viral load suppression during IAC implementation (intervention) to the period before IAC at Kisenyi Health centre IV. Data were abstracted from patient files and viral load register. The effect of IAC on viral load suppression and associated factors were analyzed using modified Poisson regression with robust standard errors. Using in-depth interviews and an inductive analysis approach in Atlas-ti 8. We also explored experiences of providing IAC among healthcare workers. RESULTS: A total of 500 records were sampled: 249 (49.8%) in the intervention period and 251 (51.2%) in the pre-intervention period. The mean age was lower during the intervention period 33.1 (± 12.0) than 36.5 (± 13.4) in the pre- intervention period, p = 0.002. More clients were currently on Protease-based regimen in the pre-intervention period 179 (71.3%) than 135 (54.2%) in the intervention period, p ≤ 0.001. In the intervention period, all eligible clients received IAC [249/249 (100.0%)]. Overall, 325 (65.0%) received IAC and of these, 143 (44.1%) achieved viral load suppression compared to 46 (26.3%) who received regular counseling. Receiving IAC significantly increased viral load suppression by 22% (aPR 1.22, 95% CI 1.01-1.47). Clients on Protease-based regimen were less likely to suppress than those on Efavirenz or Nevirapine-based regimens (aPR 0.11, 95% CI 0.08-0.15). All the interviewed healthcare workers lauded IAC for improving ART adherence. However, patient and health care system related factors hindered adherence during IAC. CONCLUSIONS: The full potential of IAC in achieving viral load suppression in this setting has not been reached due to a combination of the patient and health care system related factors. Provision of adequate IAC necessities and use of patient centered approach should be emphasized to obtain the maximum benefit of the intervention.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".