Brief Report: Understanding Preferences for HIV Care Among Patients Experiencing Homelessness or Unstable Housing: A Discrete Choice Experiment

HIV epidemiology, prevention, treatment, and implementation strategies for public health

The global HIV response has made tremendous progress but is entering a new phase with additional challenges. Scientific innovations have led to multiple safe, effective, and durable options for treatment and prevention, and long-acting formulations for 2-monthly and 6-monthly dosing are becoming available with even longer dosing intervals possible on the horizon. The scientific agenda for HIV cure and remission strategies is moving forward but faces uncertain thresholds for success and acceptability. Nonetheless, innovations in prevention and treatment have often failed to reach large segments of the global population (eg, key and marginalised populations), and these major disparities in access and uptake at multiple levels have caused progress to fall short of their potential to affect public health. Moving forward, sharper epidemiologic tools based on longitudinal, person-centred data are needed to more accurately characterise remaining gaps and guide continued progress against the HIV epidemic. We should also increase prioritisation of strategies that address socio-behavioural challenges and can lead to effective and equitable implementation of existing interventions with high levels of quality that better match individual needs. We review HIV epidemiologic trends; advances in HIV prevention, treatment, and care delivery; and discuss emerging challenges for ending the HIV epidemic over the next decade that are relevant for general practitioners and others involved in HIV care.

Understanding why racial/ethnic inequities along the HIV care continuum persist in the United States: a qualitative exploration of systemic barriers from the perspectives of African American/Black and Latino persons living with HIV

BACKGROUND

Racial/ethnic inequities along the HIV care continuum persist in the United States despite substantial federal investment. Numerous studies highlight individual and social-level impediments in HIV, but fewer foreground systemic barriers. The present qualitative study sought to uncover and describe systemic barriers to the HIV care continuum from the perspectives of African American/Black and Latino persons living with HIV (PLWH) with unsuppressed HIV viral load, including how barriers operated and their effects.

METHODS

Participants were African American/Black and Latino PLWH with unsuppressed HIV viral load (N = 41). They were purposively sampled for maximum variability on key indices from a larger study. They engaged in semi-structured in-depth interviews that were audio-recorded and professionally transcribed. Data were analyzed using directed content analysis.

RESULTS

Participants were 49 years old, on average (SD = 9), 76% were assigned male sex at birth, 83% were African American/Black and 17% Latino, 34% were sexual minorities (i.e., non-heterosexual), and 22% were transgender/gender-nonbinary. All had indications of chronic poverty. Participants had been diagnosed with HIV 19 years prior to the study, on average (SD = 9). The majority (76%) had taken HIV medication in the six weeks before enrollment, but at levels insufficient to reach HIV viral suppression. Findings underscored a primary theme describing chronic poverty as a fundamental cause of poor engagement. Related subthemes were: negative aspects of congregate versus private housing settings (e.g., triggering substance use and social isolation); generally positive experiences with health care providers, although structural and cultural competency appeared insufficient and managing health care systems was difficult; pharmacies illegally purchased HIV medication from PLWH; and COVID-19 exacerbated barriers. Participants described mitigation strategies and evidenced resilience.

CONCLUSIONS

To reduce racial/ethnic inequities and end the HIV epidemic, it is necessary to understand African American/Black and Latino PLWH's perspectives on the systemic impediments they experience throughout the HIV care continuum. This study uncovers and describes a number of salient barriers and how they operate, including unexpected findings regarding drug diversion and negative aspects of congregate housing. There is growing awareness that systemic racism is a core determinant of systemic barriers to HIV care continuum engagement. Findings are interpreted in this context.

Client preferences for HIV Care Coordination Program features in New York City: latent class analysis of a discrete choice experiment

INTRODUCTION

The PROMISE study, launched in 2018, evaluates the implementation of revisions to the HIV Care Coordination Program (CCP) designed to minimize persistent disparities in HIV outcomes among high-need persons living with HIV in New York City. We conducted a discrete choice experiment (DCE) assessing the preferences of CCP clients to inform improvements to the program's design.

METHODS

Clients chose between two hypothetical CCP options that varied across four program attributes: help with antiretroviral therapy (ART) adherence (directly observed therapy [DOT] vs. remind via phone/text vs. adherence assessment), help with primary care appointments (remind and accompany vs. remind and transport vs. remind only), help with issues other than primary care (coverage and benefits vs. housing and food vs. mental health vs. specialty medical care) and visit location (meet at home vs. via phone/video vs. program visit 30 or 60 minutes away). The latent class analysis identified different preference patterns. A choice simulation was performed to model client preferences for hypothetical CCPs as a whole.

RESULTS

One hundred and eighty-one CCP clients from six sites implementing the revised CCP completed the DCE January 2020-March 2021. Most clients had stable housing (68.5%), reported no problem substance use in the last 3 months (72.4%) and achieved viral suppression (78.5) with only 26.5% receiving DOT within a CCP. 77.3% of responses were obtained before the COVID-19 pandemic. Preferences clustered into three groups. Visit location and ART adherence support were the most important attributes. Group 1 (40%) endorsed telehealth for visit location; telehealth for ART adherence support; and help with securing housing/food; Group 2 (37%) endorsed telehealth for visit location; telehealth for ART adherence support; and staff reminding/arranging appointment transportation; Group 3 (23%) endorsed staff meeting clients at program location and staff working with clients for medication adherence. In the choice simulation, Basic and Medium hypothetical CCPs were endorsed more than Intensive CCPs.

CONCLUSIONS

This DCE revealed a strong preference for telehealth and a relatively low preference for intensive services, such as DOT and home visits; preferences were heterogeneous. The findings support differentiated care and remote service delivery options in the NYC CCP, and can inform improvements to CCP design.

Implementation of Low-Barrier Human Immunodeficiency Virus Care: Lessons Learned From the Max Clinic in Seattle

Low-barrier care (LBC) for people with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) is a differentiated service delivery strategy to engage people in HIV treatment who are not well-engaged in conventionally organized HIV medical care. The LBC approach is flexible, but experience suggests that the intervention has distinct core components. This review summarizes our experience implementing one model of LBC, the Max Clinic in Seattle; describes the core components of the intervention; and presents a framework for implementing low-barrier HIV care with the goal of providing a practical guide for clinical and public health leaders seeking to implement a new LBC program. A systematic approach to addressing key factors during LBC implementation can support practitioners to design an LBC approach that fits the local context while maintaining essential elements of the intervention.

Use of Stated Preference Methods in HIV Treatment and Prevention Research in the United States: A Systematic Review

Stated preference (SP) methods are increasingly being applied to HIV-related research and continuously provide researchers with health utility scores of select healthcare products or services that populations consider important. Following PRISMA guidelines, we sought to understand how SP methods have been applied in HIV-related research. We conducted a systematic review to identify studies meeting the following criteria: SP method is clearly stated, conducted in the United States, was published between 01/01/2012 and 02/12/2022, and included adults aged 18 and over. Study design and SP method application were also examined. We identified six SP methods (e.g., Conjoint Analysis, Discrete Choice Experiment) across 18 studies, which were categorized into one of two groups: HIV prevention and HIV treatment-care. Categories of attributes used in SP methods largely focused on: administration, physical/health effects, financial, location, access, and external influences. SP methods are innovative tools capable of informing researchers on what populations consider most beneficial when deciding on treatment, care, or prevention options for HIV.

One size does not fit all: Preferences for HIV care delivery among out-of-care people living with HIV in the Southeastern United States

Approximately half of the people with HIV (PWH) in the United States are retained in HIV care and only 57% have achieved viral suppression, due to barriers including transportation access, stigma, poor mental health, substance use, and medical mistrust. Community-based HIV care models have potential to address the diverse needs of patients and to improve retention in care, but their success is contingent on acceptance by patients and key community stakeholders. Recognizing that the preferences of PWH who are out-of-care (PWH-OOC) likely differ from those retained in care, we conducted a mixed-methods study from June 2019 to May 2021 composed of surveys with PWH-OOC (n = 50) and in-depth interviews with key clinic and community stakeholders (n = 41) to examine the relative preference and perceived advantages and disadvantages for six different community-based HIV care models versus the traditional fixed-clinic model. Survey data was analyzed to assess average rank preference for each care model and interview transcripts were thematically coded to examine factors influencing model acceptance. The highest preference for care delivery was via a mobile clinic, followed by community-based peer navigation, primary care clinics, telemedicine, traditional HIV subspeciality clinic, homeless shelter, and drug treatment center. Common factors influencing preference included convenience, accessibility, potential to preserve confidentiality, quality of care assurance, opportunity to develop rapport with their HIV care provider, access to a smart device, and potential to alleviate versus exacerbate HIV stigma. Participants discussed need for integration of care models and for individuals to choose different care models at different times. Providers and patients differed in preference for care model and weighting of relative advantages and disadvantages of each. Findings highlight the need to integrate alternative, community-based care models into the national plan to end the HIV epidemic and to allow for PWH-OOC to choose the model most fitting based on individual circumstances.

The Impact of a Walk-in Human Immunodeficiency Virus Care Model for People Who Are Incompletely Engaged in Care: The Moderate Needs (MOD) Clinic

Background

The Moderate Needs (MOD) Clinic in Seattle, Washington provides walk-in primary care for people with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) who are incompletely engaged in standard care.

Methods

We evaluated HIV outcomes among patients enrolled in the MOD Clinic (within group analysis) and, separately, among MOD patients versus patients who were MOD-eligible but did not enroll (comparison group analysis) during January 1, 2018-September 30, 2021. The primary outcome was viral suppression ([VS] viral load <200 copies/mL); secondary outcomes care engagement (≥2 visits ≥60 days apart) and sustained VS (≥2 consecutive suppressed viral loads ≥60 days apart). In the within group analysis, we examined outcomes at time of MOD enrollment versus 12 months postenrollment. In the comparison group analysis, we examined outcomes at the time of MOD eligibility versus 12 months posteligibility. Both analyses used modified Poisson regression.

Results

Most patients in MOD (N = 213) were unstably housed (52%) and had psychiatric comorbidities (86%) or hazardous substance use (81%). Among patients enrolled ≥12 months (N = 164), VS did not increase significantly from baseline to postenrollment (63% to 71%, P = .11), but care engagement and sustained VS both improved (37% to 86%, P < .001 and 20% to 53%, P < .001, respectively) from pre-enrollment to 12 months postenrollment. In the comparison group analysis, VS worsened in nonenrolled patients (N = 517) from baseline to 12 months posteligibility (82% to 75%, P < .001). Patients in the MOD Clinic who met criteria for the comparison group analysis (N = 68) were more likely than nonenrolled patients to be engaged in care at 12 months posteligibility (relative risk, 1.29; 95% confidence interval, 1.03-1.63).

Conclusions

The MOD Clinic enrollment was associated with improved engagement in care. This model adds to the spectrum of differentiated HIV care services.

Brief Report: Heterogeneous Preferences for Care Engagement Among People With HIV Experiencing Homelessness or Unstable Housing During the COVID-19 Pandemic

BACKGROUND/SETTING

In San Francisco, HIV viral suppression is 71% among housed individuals but only 20% among unhoused individuals. We conducted a discrete choice experiment at a San Francisco public HIV clinic to evaluate care preferences among people living with HIV (PLH) experiencing homelessness/unstable housing during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

From July to November 2020, we conducted a discrete choice experiment among PLH experiencing homelessness/unstable housing who accessed care through (1) an incentivized, drop-in program (POP-UP) or (2) traditional primary care. We investigated 5 program features: single provider vs team of providers; visit incentives ($0, $10, and $20); location (current site vs current + additional site); drop-in vs scheduled visits; in-person only vs optional telehealth visits; and navigator assistance. We estimated relative preferences using mixed-effects logistic regression and conducted latent class analysis to evaluate preference heterogeneity.

RESULTS

We enrolled 115 PLH experiencing homelessness/unstable housing, 40% of whom lived outdoors. The strongest preferences were for the same provider (β = 0.94, 95% CI: 0.48 to 1.41), visit incentives (β = 0.56 per $5; 95% CI: 0.47 to 0.66), and drop-in visits (β = 0.47, 95% CI: 0.12 to 0.82). Telehealth was not preferred. Latent class analysis revealed 2 distinct groups: 78 (68%) preferred a flexible care model, whereas 37 (32%) preferred a single provider.

CONCLUSIONS

We identified heterogeneous care preferences among PLH experiencing homelessness/unstable housing during the COVID-19 pandemic, with two-thirds preferring greater flexibility and one-third preferring provider continuity. Telehealth was not preferred, even with navigator facilitation. Including patient choice in service delivery design can improve care engagement, particularly for marginalized populations, and is an essential tool for ending the HIV epidemic.

Patients' preferences for antiretroviral therapy service provision: a systematic review

Background

Achieving global targets of adherence to treatment, retention in care, and treatment success remains a challenge. Health system investment to make antiretroviral therapy services more responsive to patients’ needs and values could address these impediments. Appropriate resource allocation to implement differentiated HIV treatment services demands research evidence. This study aimed to provide an overview of the patients’ preferences for antiretroviral therapy service delivery features.

Methods

Electronic databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and CINAHL) and search engines (Google and Google Scholar) were searched. This review has followed a convergent segregated approach to synthesis and integration. Data from the included studies were systematically extracted, tabulated, and summarised in a narrative review. Studies that analysed preferences for antiretroviral therapy regardless of the method used and published in the English language in any year across the world and HIV positive clients who were 15 years and above on 4th February 2021 were included for this review. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the mixed methods appraisal tool. A thematic synthesis of the data from the findings section of the main body of the qualitative study was undertaken. ATLAS.ti software version 7 was used for qualitative synthesis.

Results

From the 1054 retrieved studies, only 23 studies (16 quantitative, three qualitative, and four mixed-methods) fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The median number of attributes used in all included quantitative studies was 6 (Inter Quartile Range 3). In this review, no study has fulfilled the respective criteria in the methodological quality assessment. In the quantitative synthesis, the majority of participants more valued the outcome, whereas, in the qualitative synthesis, participants preferred more the structure aspect of antiretroviral therapy service. The thematic analysis produced 17 themes, of which ten themes were related to structure, three to process, and four to outcome dimension of Donabedian’s quality of care model. The findings from individual quantitative and qualitative syntheses complement each other.

Conclusions

In this review, participants’ value for antiretroviral therapy service characteristics varied across included studies. Priorities and values of people living with HIV should be incorporated in the policy, practice, research, and development efforts to improve the quality of antiretroviral therapy service hence avoid poor patient outcomes.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12962-021-00310-7.