Centre for Social Research in Health, UNSW Sydney, Centre for Social Research in Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Addiction. 2021 Oct;116(10):2761-2769. doi: 10.1111/add.15477. Epub 2021 Mar 24.
Mathematical modelling has demonstrated the theoretical feasibility of HCV treatment-as-prevention strategies in custodial settings, yet limited empirical data exists. The Australian 'Surveillance and Treatment of Prisoners with Hepatitis C' study is the world's first trial of hepatitis C virus (HCV) treatment-as-prevention in prison. This study aimed to analyse how expert stakeholders involved in the Australian HCV response assessed the acceptability of HCV treatment-as-prevention in prison using interview data from the SToP-C qualitative substudy.
Qualitative analysis using semi-structured interviews in Australia.
Nineteen key HCV experts.
Drawing upon Sekhon's theoretical framework of acceptability, data were organized thematically under four component constructs of acceptability: affective attitude; ethicality; opportunity costs; and perceived effectiveness.
Most differences in participant assessments of acceptability were a matter of relative emphasis and prioritization rather than absolute polarity. Nonetheless, a small minority of participants was overtly critical of the approach. Arguing against the focus on treatment, they instead advocated for prevention-as-prevention, including the improvement and expansion of existing harm reduction measures.
Qualitative analysis of expert stakeholder assessments of the acceptability of hepatitis C virus treatment-as-prevention in Australian prisons found no opposition to the universal rollout of direct-acting anti-virals, but most voiced concern regarding the lack of effective primary prevention in Australian prisons.
数学建模已经证明了在监管环境中使用 HCV 治疗作为预防策略的理论可行性,但目前只有有限的经验数据。澳大利亚的“监狱中丙型肝炎的监测和治疗”研究是世界上首例在监狱中进行 HCV 治疗作为预防的试验。本研究旨在分析参与澳大利亚 HCV 应对工作的专家利益相关者如何使用 SToP-C 定性子研究的访谈数据,评估 HCV 治疗作为预防在监狱中的可接受性。
在澳大利亚进行的定性分析,使用半结构化访谈。
19 名关键 HCV 专家。
借鉴 Sekhon 的可接受性理论框架,根据可接受性的四个组成部分构建(情感态度;伦理;机会成本;和感知效果)对数据进行主题组织。
大多数参与者对可接受性的评估差异主要是相对强调和优先化的问题,而不是绝对的极性。尽管如此,还是有一小部分参与者对该方法持明显批评态度。他们反对将重点放在治疗上,而是主张采取预防为主的方法,包括改进和扩大现有的减少伤害措施。
对澳大利亚监狱中 HCV 治疗作为预防的可接受性的专家利益相关者评估进行的定性分析发现,大多数人并不反对普遍使用直接作用抗病毒药物,但大多数人对澳大利亚监狱中缺乏有效的初级预防措施表示关注。