Individuals' experiences of the integration of substance use/addiction and HIV/AIDS services in community settings: a qualitative systematic review protocol

Promoting HIV care continuum outcomes among people who use drugs and alcohol: a systematic review of randomized trials evaluating behavioral HIV care interventions published from 2011 to 2023

BACKGROUND

Substance use remains a robust predictor of HIV infection and a serious impediment to HIV care continuum progression for people living with HIV. The primary research question of this systematic review is focused on understanding the extent to which behavioral HIV care interventions have been efficacious in helping people who live with HIV and who use substances along the HIV care continuum.

METHODS

Using PubMed and ProQuest databases, we performed a systematic review of randomized trials of behavioral HIV care continuum interventions among people who use substances published from 2011 to August 2023, since the beginning of the treatment-as-prevention era.

RESULTS

We identified 11 studies (total participants: N = 5635), ten intentionally targeting substance-using populations. Four studies involved samples using ≥ 1 substance (e.g., alcohol, opioids, stimulants, marijuana); four involved injection drug use; one involved methamphetamine use; and one involved alcohol use. One study targeted a population with incidental substance use (i.e., alcohol, injection drug use, non-injection drug use reported in most participants). Each study defined one or more HIV care outcomes of interest. Viral suppression was an outcome targeted in 9/11 studies, followed by uptake of antiretroviral therapy (ART; 7/11), ART adherence (6/11), retention in care (5/11), and linkage to care (3/11). While most (nine) of the studies found significant effects on at least one HIV care outcome, findings were mostly mixed. Mediated (2/11) and moderated (2/11) effects were minimally examined.

CONCLUSIONS

The results from this systematic review demonstrate mixed findings concerning the efficacy of previous HIV care interventions to improve HIV care continuum outcomes among people who use substances. However, heterogeneity of study components (e.g., diversity of substances used/assessed, self-report vs. objective measures, attrition) prevent broad deductions or conclusions about the amenability of specific substance-using populations to HIV care intervention. More coordinated, comprehensive, and targeted efforts are needed to promote and disentangle intervention effects on HIV care continuum outcomes among substance-using populations.

Service integration: The perspective of Australian alcohol and other drug (AOD) nurses

The recently released Victorian Mental Health Royal Commission report has recommended a shift to integrated treatment, defined as treatment for alcohol and substance use disorders and mental ill health occurring in parallel, rather than distinct systems catering to each need. However, little work has sought to determine the perceptions of nurses working in alcohol and other drug (AOD) treatment towards integrating with mental health services. In this study, we explore the perspectives of specialist AOD nurses towards the integration of mental health and AOD treatment services. Secondary analysis of semi-structured interviews with Australian specialist AOD nurses (n = 46) conducted as part of a wider workforce study in 2019. Data were analysed using thematic analysis and reported using the COREQ guidelines. Of the interviews analysed, six were AOD nurses working in an Australian state that had recently undergone service integration; however, many participants expressed perceptions of service integration. Two key themes are reported in this paper: (i) perceptions of service integration, where AOD nurses participating in our study were concerned that integration would result in the model of care they worked under being replaced by a mental health-based model that was felt to be highly risk averse, and (ii) experiences of service integration. Concerns about the focus of care as well as the complexity of care differing between the two services demonstrated a contrast in both philosophical approaches to work with consumers and legislative difference in voluntary versus compulsory care provision.