Suppr超能文献

坚持俱乐部和分散药物配送,以支持患者保留和持续病毒抑制:南非差异化抗逆转录病毒治疗(ART)交付模式的集群随机评估结果。

Adherence clubs and decentralized medication delivery to support patient retention and sustained viral suppression in care: Results from a cluster-randomized evaluation of differentiated ART delivery models in South Africa.

机构信息

Department of Global Health, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America.

Department of Epidemiology, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America.

出版信息

PLoS Med. 2019 Jul 23;16(7):e1002874. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1002874. eCollection 2019 Jul.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Differentiated antiretroviral therapy (ART) delivery models, in which patients are provided with care relevant to their current status (e.g., newly initiating, stable on treatment, or unstable on treatment) has become an essential part of patient-centered health systems. In 2015, the South African government implemented Chronic Disease Adherence Guidelines (AGLs), which involved five interventions: Fast Track Initiation Counseling for newly initiating patients, Enhanced Adherence Counseling for patients with an unsuppressed viral load, Early Tracing of patients who miss visits, and Adherence Clubs (ACs) and Decentralized Medication Delivery (DMD) for stable patients. We evaluated two of these interventions in 24 South African facilities: ACs, in which patients meet in groups outside usual clinic procedures and receive medication; and DMD, in which patients pick up their medication outside usual pharmacy queues.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

We compared those participating in ACs or receiving DMD at intervention sites to those eligible for ACs or DMD at control sites. Outcomes were retention and sustained viral suppression (<400 copies/mL) 12 months after AC or DMD enrollment (or comparable time for controls). 12 facilities were randomly allocated to intervention and 12 to control arms in four provinces (Gauteng, North West, Limpopo, and KwaZulu Natal). We calculated adjusted risk differences (aRDs) with cluster adjustment using generalized estimating equations (GEEs) using difference in differences (DiD) with patients eligible for ACs/DMD prior to implementation (Jan 1, 2015) for comparison. For DMD, randomization was not preserved, and the analysis was treated as observational. For ACs, 275 intervention and 294 control patients were enrolled; 72% of patients were female, 61% were aged 30-49 years, and median CD4 count at ART initiation was 268 cells/μL. AC patients had higher 1-year retention (89.5% versus 81.6%, aRD: 8.3%; 95% CI: 1.1% to 15.6%) and comparable sustained 1-year viral suppression (<400 copies/mL any time ≤ 18 months) (80.0% versus 79.6%, aRD: 3.8%; 95% CI: -6.9% to 14.4%). Retention associations were apparently stronger for men than women (men RD: 13.1%, 95% CI: 0.3% to 23.5%; women RD: 6.0%, 95% CI: -0.9% to 12.9%). For DMD, 232 intervention and 346 control patients were enrolled; 71% of patients were female, 65% were aged 30-49 years, and median CD4 count at ART initiation was 270 cells/μL. DMD patients had apparently lower retention (81.5% versus 87.2%, aRD: -5.9%; 95% CI: -12.5% to 0.8%) and comparable viral suppression versus standard of care (77.2% versus 74.3%, aRD: -1.0%; 95% CI: -12.2% to 10.1%), though in both cases, our findings were imprecise. We also noted apparently increased viral suppression among men (RD: 11.1%; 95% CI: -3.4% to 25.5%). The main study limitations were missing data and lack of randomization in the DMD analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, we found comparable DMD outcomes versus standard of care at facilities, a benefit for retention of patients in care with ACs, and apparent benefits in terms of retention (for AC patients) and sustained viral suppression (for DMD patients) among men. This suggests the importance of alternative service delivery models for men and of community-based strategies to decongest primary healthcare facilities. Because these strategies also reduce patient inconvenience and decongest clinics, comparable outcomes are a potential success. The cost of all five AGL interventions and possible effects on reducing clinic congestion should be investigated.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT02536768.

摘要

背景

差异化的抗逆转录病毒治疗(ART)提供模式,即根据患者的当前状况为其提供相关护理(如新启动治疗、治疗稳定或治疗不稳定),已成为以患者为中心的卫生系统的重要组成部分。2015 年,南非政府实施了慢性疾病依从性指南(AGL),其中包括五项干预措施:新启动患者的快速启动咨询、未抑制病毒载量患者的增强依从性咨询、错过就诊的患者的早期追踪以及依耐性俱乐部(AC)和分散药物配送(DMD)。我们评估了这 24 个南非机构中的两种干预措施:AC,即患者在常规门诊程序之外的小组中会面并接受药物治疗;以及 DMD,即患者在常规药房队列之外取药。

方法和发现

我们将在干预点参加 AC 或接受 DMD 的患者与在对照点有资格参加 AC 或 DMD 的患者进行了比较。12 个月后,评估了两组患者的保留率和持续病毒抑制率(<400 拷贝/mL)(或对对照组进行了可比时间的评估)。在四个省份(豪登省、西北省、林波波省和夸祖鲁-纳塔尔省),随机将 12 个设施分配到干预组和 12 个对照组。我们使用广义估计方程(GEE)通过差异差异(DiD)进行了调整风险差异(aRD)的计算,使用实施前(2015 年 1 月 1 日)有资格参加 ACs/DMD 的患者进行了比较。对于 DMD,随机分组未得到保留,因此分析为观察性。对于 AC,有 275 名干预组和 294 名对照组患者入组;72%的患者为女性,61%的患者年龄在 30-49 岁之间,ART 启动时的中位数 CD4 计数为 268 个/μL。AC 患者的 1 年保留率更高(89.5%比 81.6%,aRD:8.3%;95%CI:1.1%至 15.6%),1 年持续病毒抑制率相当(<400 拷贝/mL 任何时间≤18 个月)(80.0%比 79.6%,aRD:3.8%;95%CI:-6.9%至 14.4%)。对于男性来说,保留关联似乎比女性更强(男性 RD:13.1%,95%CI:0.3%至 23.5%;女性 RD:6.0%,95%CI:-0.9%至 12.9%)。对于 DMD,有 232 名干预组和 346 名对照组患者入组;71%的患者为女性,65%的患者年龄在 30-49 岁之间,ART 启动时的中位数 CD4 计数为 270 个/μL。DMD 患者的保留率明显较低(81.5%比 87.2%,aRD:-5.9%;95%CI:-12.5%至 0.8%),与标准护理相比,病毒抑制率相当(77.2%比 74.3%,aRD:-1.0%;95%CI:-12.2%至 10.1%),尽管在这两种情况下,我们的发现都不够精确。我们还注意到男性的病毒抑制率明显升高(RD:11.1%;95%CI:-3.4%至 25.5%)。主要研究局限性是数据缺失和 DMD 分析中缺乏随机分组。

结论

在这项研究中,我们发现与设施的标准护理相比,DMD 有相当的结果,AC 患者在护理中保留率的提高,以及男性在保留率(AC 患者)和持续病毒抑制率(DMD 患者)方面的明显获益。这表明,对于男性和以社区为基础的策略来缓解初级保健设施的拥堵,替代服务提供模式非常重要。由于这些策略还减少了患者的不便和诊所的拥堵,因此相当的结果是潜在的成功。应该调查所有五项 AGL 干预措施的成本以及对减少诊所拥堵的可能影响。

临床试验注册

NCT02536768。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/d352/6650049/40feccc98fc1/pmed.1002874.g001.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验