Department of Epidemiology, New York University College of Global Public Health, New York, New York, United States of America.
New York University School of Medicine, New York, New York, United States of America.
PLoS One. 2019 Feb 22;14(2):e0212296. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0212296. eCollection 2019.
Integrated cardiovascular disease (CVD) and HIV (CVD-HIV) care interventions are being adopted to tackle the growing burden of noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) in low-and middle-income countries (LMICs) but there is a paucity of studies on the feasibility of these interventions in LMICs. This scoping review aims to present evidence of the feasibility of integrated CVD-HIV care in LMICs, and the alignment of feasibility reporting in LMICs with the existing implementation science methodology.
A systematic search of published articles including systematic and narrative reviews that reported on integrated CVD-HIV care was conducted, using multiple search engines including PubMed/Medline, Global Health, and Web of Science. We examined the articles for evidence of feasibility reporting. Adopting the definition of Proctor and colleagues (2011), feasibility was defined as the extent to which an intervention was plausible in a given agency or setting. Evidence from the articles was synthesized by level of integration, the chronic care continuum, and stages of intervention development.
Twenty studies, reported in 18 articles and 3 conferences abstracts, reported on feasibility of integrated CVD-HIV care interventions. These studies were conducted in Sub-Saharan Africa, Southeast Asia and South America. Four of these studies were conducted as feasibility studies. Eighty percent of the studies reported feasibility, using descriptive sentences that included words synonymous with feasibility terminologies in existing definition recommended by Proctor and colleagues. There was also an overlap in the use of descriptive phrases for feasibility amongst the selected studies.
Integrating CVD and HIV care is feasible in LMICs, although methodology for reporting feasibility is inconsistent. Assessing feasibility based on settings and integration goals will provide a unique perspective of the implementation landscape in LMICs. There is a need for consistency in measures in order to accurately assess the feasibility of integrated CVD-HIV care in LMICs.
综合心血管疾病 (CVD) 和艾滋病毒 (CVD-HIV) 护理干预措施正在被采用，以应对中低收入国家 (LMICs) 日益增长的非传染性疾病 (NCDs) 负担，但关于这些干预措施在 LMICs 中可行性的研究却很少。本范围综述旨在介绍在 LMICs 中进行综合 CVD-HIV 护理的可行性证据，以及在 LMICs 中可行性报告与现有实施科学方法的一致性。
使用多个搜索引擎，包括 PubMed/Medline、全球健康和 Web of Science，对已发表的文章进行了系统搜索，包括系统和叙述性综述，这些文章报告了综合 CVD-HIV 护理的情况。我们检查了这些文章中关于可行性报告的证据。根据 Proctor 及其同事（2011 年）的定义，可行性被定义为干预措施在给定机构或环境中是否可行的程度。通过整合水平、慢性病连续体和干预措施发展阶段对文章中的证据进行了综合。
20 项研究，发表在 18 篇文章和 3 个会议摘要中，报告了综合 CVD-HIV 护理干预措施的可行性。这些研究在撒哈拉以南非洲、东南亚和南美洲进行。其中 4 项研究作为可行性研究进行。80%的研究报告了可行性，使用了描述性句子，其中包括与 Proctor 及其同事推荐的现有定义中的可行性术语同义的词。所选研究中也存在用于可行性的描述性短语的重叠。
在 LMICs 中，综合心血管疾病和艾滋病毒护理是可行的，尽管报告可行性的方法不一致。根据设定和整合目标评估可行性将为 LMICs 的实施情况提供独特的视角。需要在措施上保持一致，以便准确评估 LMICs 中综合 CVD-HIV 护理的可行性。
