Diya Jhuti, Gohar Zakaryan, Hussein El-Kechen, Nadia Rehman, Mark Youssef, Cristian Garcia, Vaibhav Arora, Babalwa Zani, Alvin Leenus, Michael Wu, Oluwatoni Makanjuola, Lawrence Mbuagbaw
{"title":"描述参与艾滋病毒护理级联:一项方法学研究。","authors":"Diya Jhuti, Gohar Zakaryan, Hussein El-Kechen, Nadia Rehman, Mark Youssef, Cristian Garcia, Vaibhav Arora, Babalwa Zani, Alvin Leenus, Michael Wu, Oluwatoni Makanjuola, Lawrence Mbuagbaw","doi":"10.2147/HIV.S406524","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Engagement in the HIV care cascade is required for people living with HIV (PLWH) to achieve an undetectable viral load. However, varying definitions of engagement exist, contributing to heterogeneity in research regarding how many individuals are actively participating and benefitting from care. A standardized definition is needed to enhance comparability and pooling of data from engagement studies.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The objective of this paper was to describe the various definitions for engagement used in HIV clinical trials.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Articles were retrieved from CASCADE, a database of 298 clinical trials conducted to improve the HIV care cascade (https://hivcarecascade.com/), curated by income level, vulnerable population, who delivered the intervention, the setting in which it was delivered, the intervention type, and the level of pragmatism of the intervention. Studies with engagement listed as an outcome were selected from this database.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>13 studies were eligible, of which five did not provide an explicit definition for engagement. The remaining studies used one or more of the following: appointment adherence (n=6), laboratory testing (n=2), adherence to antiretroviral therapy (n=2), time specification (n=5), intervention adherence (n=5), and quality of interaction (n=1).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This paper highlights the existing diversity in definitions for engagement in the HIV care cascade and categorize these definitions into appointment adherence, laboratory testing, adherence to antiretroviral therapy, time specification, intervention adherence, and quality of interaction. We recommend consensus on how to describe and measure engagement.</p>","PeriodicalId":46555,"journal":{"name":"HIV AIDS-Research and Palliative Care","volume":"15 ","pages":"257-265"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/db/f6/hiv-15-257.PMC10226482.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Describing Engagement in the HIV Care Cascade: A Methodological Study.\",\"authors\":\"Diya Jhuti, Gohar Zakaryan, Hussein El-Kechen, Nadia Rehman, Mark Youssef, Cristian Garcia, Vaibhav Arora, Babalwa Zani, Alvin Leenus, Michael Wu, Oluwatoni Makanjuola, Lawrence Mbuagbaw\",\"doi\":\"10.2147/HIV.S406524\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Engagement in the HIV care cascade is required for people living with HIV (PLWH) to achieve an undetectable viral load. However, varying definitions of engagement exist, contributing to heterogeneity in research regarding how many individuals are actively participating and benefitting from care. A standardized definition is needed to enhance comparability and pooling of data from engagement studies.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The objective of this paper was to describe the various definitions for engagement used in HIV clinical trials.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Articles were retrieved from CASCADE, a database of 298 clinical trials conducted to improve the HIV care cascade (https://hivcarecascade.com/), curated by income level, vulnerable population, who delivered the intervention, the setting in which it was delivered, the intervention type, and the level of pragmatism of the intervention. Studies with engagement listed as an outcome were selected from this database.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>13 studies were eligible, of which five did not provide an explicit definition for engagement. The remaining studies used one or more of the following: appointment adherence (n=6), laboratory testing (n=2), adherence to antiretroviral therapy (n=2), time specification (n=5), intervention adherence (n=5), and quality of interaction (n=1).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This paper highlights the existing diversity in definitions for engagement in the HIV care cascade and categorize these definitions into appointment adherence, laboratory testing, adherence to antiretroviral therapy, time specification, intervention adherence, and quality of interaction. We recommend consensus on how to describe and measure engagement.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46555,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"HIV AIDS-Research and Palliative Care\",\"volume\":\"15 \",\"pages\":\"257-265\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/db/f6/hiv-15-257.PMC10226482.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"HIV AIDS-Research and Palliative Care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2147/HIV.S406524\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"INFECTIOUS DISEASES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"HIV AIDS-Research and Palliative Care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/HIV.S406524","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Describing Engagement in the HIV Care Cascade: A Methodological Study.
Introduction: Engagement in the HIV care cascade is required for people living with HIV (PLWH) to achieve an undetectable viral load. However, varying definitions of engagement exist, contributing to heterogeneity in research regarding how many individuals are actively participating and benefitting from care. A standardized definition is needed to enhance comparability and pooling of data from engagement studies.
Objectives: The objective of this paper was to describe the various definitions for engagement used in HIV clinical trials.
Methods: Articles were retrieved from CASCADE, a database of 298 clinical trials conducted to improve the HIV care cascade (https://hivcarecascade.com/), curated by income level, vulnerable population, who delivered the intervention, the setting in which it was delivered, the intervention type, and the level of pragmatism of the intervention. Studies with engagement listed as an outcome were selected from this database.
Results: 13 studies were eligible, of which five did not provide an explicit definition for engagement. The remaining studies used one or more of the following: appointment adherence (n=6), laboratory testing (n=2), adherence to antiretroviral therapy (n=2), time specification (n=5), intervention adherence (n=5), and quality of interaction (n=1).
Conclusion: This paper highlights the existing diversity in definitions for engagement in the HIV care cascade and categorize these definitions into appointment adherence, laboratory testing, adherence to antiretroviral therapy, time specification, intervention adherence, and quality of interaction. We recommend consensus on how to describe and measure engagement.
期刊介绍:
About Dove Medical Press Dove Medical Press Ltd is part of Taylor & Francis Group, the Academic Publishing Division of Informa PLC. We specialize in the publication of Open Access peer-reviewed journals across the broad spectrum of science, technology and especially medicine. Dove Medical Press was founded in 2003 with the objective of combining the highest editorial standards with the ''best of breed'' new publishing technologies. We have offices in Manchester and London in the United Kingdom, representatives in Princeton, New Jersey in the United States, and our editorial offices are in Auckland, New Zealand. Dr Scott Fraser is our Medical Director based in the UK. He has been in full time clinical practice for over 20 years as well as having an active research interest.