Farooq Hamzah Z, Whitton Louise, Mwendera Chikondi, Divall Pip, Spitters Sophie J I M, Anderson Jane, Thornhill John P
SHARE Collaborative, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.
Blizard Institute, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.
HIV Med. 2025 Jan;26(1):44-69. doi: 10.1111/hiv.13701. Epub 2024 Sep 17.
The COVID-19 pandemic prompted an unprecedented surge in virtual services, necessitating a rapid shift to digital healthcare approaches. This review focuses on evaluating the evidence of virtual care (VC) in delivering HIV care, considering the complex nature of HIV and the need for tailored-approaches, especially for marginalized populations.
A mixed-methods systematic review was performed with searches on five databases, covering studies from January 1946 to May 2022. Inclusion criteria involved two-way virtual consultations between healthcare workers and people living with HIV (PLHIV), with detailed descriptions and outcomes. Qualitative and quantitative studies were included, and the risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa score and Stenfors' framework.
Among 4143 identified records, 26 studies met the criteria, with various models of care described. The majority of studies were observational, and videoconferencing was the primary mode of virtual consultation employed. Quantitative analysis revealed PLHIV generally accept VC, with high attendance rates (87%). Mean acceptability and satisfaction rates were 80% and 85%, respectively, while 87% achieved HIV viral suppression. The setting and models of VC implementation varied, with some introduced in response to COVID-19 while others were as part of trials.
VC for PLHIV is deemed an acceptable and effective approach and is associated with good virological outcomes. Data on other health outcomes is lacking. The review underscores the importance of diverse models of care, patient choice and comprehensive training initiatives for both staff and patients. Establishing a 'gold standard' for VC models is crucial for ensuring appropriate and effective reviews of PLHIV in virtual settings.
新冠疫情促使虚拟服务出现前所未有的激增,这就需要迅速转向数字医疗方法。本综述着重评估虚拟护理(VC)在提供艾滋病毒护理方面的证据,同时考虑到艾滋病毒的复杂性以及采用量身定制方法的必要性,尤其是针对边缘化人群。
进行了一项混合方法的系统综述,在五个数据库中进行检索,涵盖1946年1月至2022年5月的研究。纳入标准包括医护人员与艾滋病毒感染者(PLHIV)之间的双向虚拟咨询,并要有详细描述和结果。纳入了定性和定量研究,并使用纽卡斯尔-渥太华评分和斯滕福斯框架评估偏倚风险。
在4143条检索到的记录中,26项研究符合标准,描述了各种护理模式。大多数研究为观察性研究,视频会议是采用的主要虚拟咨询模式。定量分析显示,艾滋病毒感染者普遍接受虚拟护理,出勤率很高(87%)。平均接受率和满意率分别为80%和85%,同时87%的人实现了艾滋病毒病毒抑制。虚拟护理实施的环境和模式各不相同,有些是因应新冠疫情而引入的,而其他的则是作为试验的一部分。
为艾滋病毒感染者提供虚拟护理被认为是一种可接受且有效的方法,并且与良好的病毒学结果相关。缺乏关于其他健康结果的数据。该综述强调了多样化护理模式、患者选择以及针对工作人员和患者的全面培训举措的重要性。为虚拟护理模式建立“黄金标准”对于确保在虚拟环境中对艾滋病毒感染者进行适当和有效的评估至关重要。