A Living Database of HIV Implementation Research (LIVE Project): Protocol for Rapid Living Reviews

Implementation strategies to improve HIV care cascade outcomes in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review from 2014 to 2021

INTRODUCTION

In low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), which are disproportionately affected by the HIV epidemic and manage limited resources, optimized implementation strategies are needed to enhance the efficiency of the HIV response. Assessing strategy usage to date could identify research gaps and inform future implementation efforts. We conducted a systematic review to describe the features and distributions of published implementation strategies attempting to improve HIV treatment service delivery and outcomes.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase, and CINAHL and screened abstracts and full texts published between 1 January 2014 and 27 August 2021, for English-language studies conducted in LMICs that described the implementation of HIV intervention and reported at least one HIV care cascade outcome, ranging from HIV testing to viral suppression. Implementation strategies were inductively specified, characterized by unique combinations of actor, action and action target, and summarized based on existing implementation strategy taxonomies. All strategies included in this study were independently reviewed to ensure accuracy and consistency.

RESULTS

We identified 44,126 abstracts and reviewed 1504 full-text manuscripts. Among 485 included studies, 83% were conducted in sub-Saharan Africa; the rest were conducted in South-East Asia and Western Pacific (12%), and the Americas (8%). A total of 7253 unique implementation strategies were identified, including changing health service delivery (48%) and providing capacity building and support strategies (34%). Healthcare providers and researchers led 59% and 28% of the strategies, respectively. People living with HIV and their communities (62%) and healthcare providers (38%) were common strategy targets. Strategies attempting to change governance, financial arrangements and implementation processes were rarely reported.

DISCUSSION

We identified a range of published implementation strategies that addressed HIV cascade outcomes, though some key gaps exist. We may need to expand the application of implementation strategies to ensure that all stakeholders are meaningfully involved to support equitable implementation efforts across the geographic regions and target populations, and to optimize implementation outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Some health service delivery and capacity building and support strategies have been most commonly used to date. Future research and implementation may incorporate a more diverse range of strategies and detailed reporting on their usage to inform improved HIV responses globally.

Challenges and Opportunities for Paving the Road to Global Health Equity Through Implementation Science

Implementation science focuses on enhancing the widespread uptake of evidence-based interventions into routine practice to improve population health. However, optimizing implementation science to promote health equity in domestic and global resource-limited settings requires considering historical and sociopolitical processes (e.g., colonization, structural racism) and centering in local sociocultural and indigenous cultures and values. This review weaves together principles of decolonization and antiracism to inform critical and reflexive perspectives on partnerships that incorporate a focus on implementation science, with the goal of making progress toward global health equity. From an implementation science perspective, wesynthesize examples of public health evidence-based interventions, strategies, and outcomes applied in global settings that are promising for health equity, alongside a critical examination of partnerships, context, and frameworks operationalized in these studies. We conclude with key future directions to optimize the application of implementation science with a justice orientation to promote global health equity.

Is it possible to make 'living' guidelines? An evaluation of the Australian Living Stroke Guidelines

BACKGROUND

Keeping best practice guidelines up-to-date with rapidly emerging research evidence is challenging. 'Living guidelines' approaches enable continual incorporation of new research, assisting healthcare professionals to apply the latest evidence to their clinical practice. However, information about how living guidelines are developed, maintained and applied is limited. The Stroke Foundation in Australia was one of the first organisations to apply living guideline development methods for their Living Stroke Guidelines (LSGs), presenting a unique opportunity to evaluate the process and impact of this novel approach.

METHODS

A mixed-methods study was conducted to understand the experience of LSGs developers and end-users. We used thematic analysis of one-on-one semi-structured interview and online survey data to determine the feasibility, acceptability, and facilitators and barriers of the LSGs. Website analytics data were also reviewed to understand usage.

RESULTS

Overall, the living guidelines approach was both feasible and acceptable to developers and users. Facilitators to use included collaboration with multidisciplinary clinicians and stroke survivors or carers. Increased workload for developers, workload unpredictability, and limited information sharing, and interoperability of technological platforms were identified as barriers. Users indicated increased trust in the LSGs (69%), likelihood of following the LSGs (66%), and frequency of access (58%), compared with previous static versions. Web analytics data showed individual access by 16,517 users in 2016 rising to 53,154 users in 2020, a threefold increase. There was also a fourfold increase in unique LSG pageviews from 2016 to 2020.

CONCLUSIONS

This study, the first evaluation of living guidelines, demonstrates that this approach to stroke guideline development is feasible and acceptable, that these approaches may add value to developers and users, and may increase guideline use. Future evaluations should be embedded along with guideline implementation to capture data prospectively.

Strengthening implementation guidelines for HIV service delivery: Considerations for future evidence generation and synthesis

Ingrid Eshun-Wilson and colleagues summarize gaps in primary HIV implementation research methods and reporting, and propose areas for future methodological development.