Practical and Ethical Concerns in Implementing Enhanced Surveillance Methods to Improve Continuity of HIV Care: Qualitative Expert Stakeholder Study

Costs and cost-effectiveness of a collaborative data-to-care intervention for HIV treatment and care in the United States

INTRODUCTION

Data-to-care programmes utilize surveillance data to identify persons who are out of HIV care, re-engage them in care and improve HIV care outcomes. We assess the costs and cost-effectiveness of re-engagement in an HIV care intervention in the United States.

METHODS

The Cooperative Re-engagement Control Trial (CoRECT) employed a data-to-care collaborative model between health departments and HIV care providers, August 2016-July 2018. The health departments in Connecticut (CT), Massachusetts (MA) and Philadelphia (PHL) collaborated with HIV clinics to identify newly out-of-care patients and randomize them to receive usual linkage and engagement in care services (standard-of-care control arm) or health department-initiated active re-engagement services (intervention arm). We used a microcosting approach to identify the activities and resources involved in the CoRECT intervention, separate from the standard-of-care, and quantified the costs. The cost data were collected at the start-up and recurrent phases of the trial to incorporate potential variation in the intervention costs. The costs were estimated from the healthcare provider perspective.

RESULTS

The CoRECT trial in CT, MA and PHL randomly assigned on average 327, 316 and 305 participants per year either to the intervention arm (n = 166, 159 and 155) or the standard-of-care arm (n = 161, 157 and 150), respectively. Of those randomized, the number of participants re-engaged in care within 90 days in the intervention and standard-of-care arms was 85 and 70 in CT, 84 and 70 in MA, and 98 and 67 in PHL. The additional number of participants re-engaged in care in the intervention arm compared with those in the standard-of-care arm was 15 (CT), 14 (MA) and 31 (PHL). We estimated the annual total cost of the CoRECT intervention at $490,040 in CT, $473,297 in MA and $439,237 in PHL. The average cost per participant enrolled was $2952, $2977 and $2834 and the average cost per participant re-engaged in care was $5765, $5634 and $4482. We estimated an incremental cost per participant re-engaged in care at $32,669 (CT), $33,807 (MA) and $14,169 (PHL).

CONCLUSIONS

The costs of the CoRECT intervention that identified newly out-of-care patients and re-engaged them in HIV care are comparable with other similar interventions, suggesting a potential for its cost-effectiveness in the US context.

Advancing a Data Justice Framework for Public Health Surveillance

BACKGROUND

Bioethical debates about privacy, big data, and public health surveillance have not sufficiently engaged the perspectives of those being surveilled. The data justice framework suggests that big data applications have the potential to create disproportionate harm for socially marginalized groups. Using examples from our research on HIV surveillance for individuals incarcerated in jails, we analyze ethical issues in deploying big data in public health surveillance.

METHODS

We conducted qualitative, semi-structured interviews with 24 people living with HIV who had been previously incarcerated in county jails about their perspectives on and experiences with HIV surveillance, as part of a larger study to characterize ethical considerations in leveraging big data techniques to enhance continuity of care for incarcerated people living with HIV.

RESULTS

Most participants expressed support for the state health department tracking HIV testing results and viral load data. Several viewed HIV surveillance as a violation of privacy, and several had actively avoided contact from state public health outreach workers. Participants were most likely to express reservations about surveillance when they viewed the state's motives as self-interested. Perspectives highlight the mistrust that structurally vulnerable people may have in the state's capacity to act as an agent of welfare. Findings suggest that adopting a nuanced, context-sensitive view on surveillance is essential.

CONCLUSIONS

Establishing trustworthiness through interpersonal interactions with public health personnel is important to reversing historical legacies of harm to racial minorities and structurally vulnerable groups. Empowering stakeholders to participate in the design and implementation of data infrastructure and governance is critical for advancing a data justice agenda, and can offset privacy concerns. The next steps in advancing the data justice framework in public health surveillance will be to innovate ways to represent the voices of structurally vulnerable groups in the design and governance of big data initiatives.

Jail-Based Data-to-Care to Improve Continuity of HIV Care: Perspectives and Experiences from Previously Incarcerated Individuals

Incarceration can disrupt retention in HIV care and viral suppression, yet it can also present an opportunity to reengage people living with HIV (PLWH) in care. Data-to-care (D2C) is a promising new public health strategy that uses HIV surveillance data to improve continuity of care for PLWH. The goal of this study was to examine perspectives on and experiences with D2C among PLWH who had recently been incarcerated in jail. Semistructured, qualitative interviews were conducted with 24 PLWH in community and prison settings about (1) knowledge of and experiences with D2C and (2) attitudes about implementing D2C in the jail setting. Participants who had been contacted for D2C described their interactions with state public health workers favorably, although almost half were not aware that the state performs HIV surveillance and D2C. While most participants indicated they would welcome assistance from the state for reengaging in care, they also framed retention in care as an individual responsibility. Most participants supported the idea of jail-based D2C. A vocal minority expressed adamant opposition, citing concerns about the violation of privacy and the threat of violence in the jail setting. Findings from this study suggest that D2C interventions in jails could be beneficial to reengaging PLWH in care, and acceptable to PLWH if done in a way that is sensitive to the needs and concerns of incarcerated individuals. If implemented, jail-based D2C programs must be designed with care to preserve privacy, confidentiality, and the autonomy of incarcerated individuals.