Michael Kharfen

Linkage, Engagement, and Viral Suppression Rates among HIV-Infected Persons Receiving Care at Medical Case Management Programs in Washington, DC

Background:The District of Columbia Department of Health funds facilities to provide HIV medical case management (MCM), inclusive of linkage, engagement in care, and treatment adherence support. The objective of this analysis was to identify the differences in the clinical outcomes among HIV-infected persons receiving care at MCM-funded facilities compared with those in nonfunded facilities. Methods:Newly diagnosed and prevalent HIV-infected persons were identified from the District of Columbia Department of Health surveillance system. Clinical outcomes of interest were linkage, retention in care, and viral suppression. Bivariate analyses and random effects logistic regression were used to examine the differences in demographics and clinical outcomes of persons receiving care at MCM-funded and nonfunded facilities. Results:Among 5631 prevalent cases, 56.7% received care at MCM-funded facilities of which 76.2% were retained in care, and 70.6% achieved viral suppression. Those receiving care in MCM-funded facilities were significantly more likely to be retained in care [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 4.13; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.93 to 8.85] and as likely (aOR 1.06; 95% CI: 0.68 to 1.62) to be virally suppressed than persons receiving care in nonfunded facilities. Among 789 newly diagnosed persons, those diagnosed in MCM-funded facilities were not significantly more likely to be linked to care within 3 months (aOR 0.50; 95% CI: 0.21 to 1.18) than those diagnosed in nonfunded facilities. Discussion:This study provides evidence that MCM may be beneficial to HIV-infected persons in DC by improving retention in care. Further identification of the specific services providing the most benefit to clients is needed, including a better understanding of the complex relationship between retention and viral suppression.

Disparities in achieving and sustaining viral suppression among a large cohort of HIV-infected persons in care – Washington, DC*

ABSTRACT One goal of the HIV care continuum is achieving viral suppression (VS), yet disparities in suppression exist among subpopulations of HIV-infected persons. We sought to identify disparities in both the ability to achieve and sustain VS among an urban cohort of HIV-infected persons in care. Data from HIV-infected persons enrolled at the 13 DC Cohort study clinical sites between January 2011 and June 2014 were analyzed. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression were conducted to identify factors associated with achieving VS (viral load < 200 copies/ml) at least once, and Kaplan–Meier (KM) curves and Cox proportional hazards models were used to identify factors associated with sustaining VS and time to virologic failure (VL ≥ 200 copies/ml after achievement of VS). Among the 4311 participants, 95.4% were either virally suppressed at study enrollment or able to achieve VS during the follow-up period. In multivariate analyses, achieving VS was significantly associated with age (aOR: 1.04; 95%CI: 1.03–1.06 per five-year increase) and having a higher CD4 (aOR: 1.05, 95% CI 1.04–1.06 per 100 cells/mm3). Patients infected through perinatal transmission were less likely to achieve VS compared to MSM patients (aOR: 0.63, 95% CI 0.51–0.79). Once achieved, most participants (74.4%) sustained VS during follow-up. Blacks and perinatally infected persons were less likely to have sustained VS in KM survival analysis (log rank chi-square p ≤ .001 for both) compared to other races and risk groups. Earlier time to failure was observed among females, Blacks, publically insured, perinatally infected, those with longer standing HIV infection, and those with diagnoses of mental health issues or depression. Among this HIV-infected cohort, most people achieved and maintained VS; however, disparities exist with regard to patient age, race, HIV transmission risk, and co-morbid conditions. Identifying populations with disparate outcomes allows for appropriate targeting of resources to improve outcomes along the care continuum.

Hiv Medical Providers' Perceptions of the Use of Antiretroviral Therapy as Nonoccupational Postexposure Prophylaxis in 2 Major Metropolitan Areas

Introduction:In 2005, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention expanded its recommendation of postexposure prophylaxis (PEP) use in the workplace to include nonoccupational exposures (nPEP). The availability and extensive use of nPEP have not achieved widespread acceptance among health-care providers of high-risk populations, and public health and primary care agencies have been sparse in their implementation of nPEP promotion, protocols, and practices. Methods:We conducted a survey of HIV providers (n = 142, response rate = 61%) in Miami-Dade County (Florida) and the District of Columbia that focused on their knowledge, attitudes, beliefs, and practices related to the delivery of nPEP. We then analyzed differences in survey responses by site and by history of prescribing nPEP using bivariate and multivariate logistic regression. Results:More District of Columbia providers (59.7%) reported ever prescribing nPEP than in Miami (39.5%, P < 0.048). The majority of practices in both cities did not have a written nPEP protocol and rarely or never had patients request nPEP. Multivariable analysis for history of prescribing nPEP was dominated by having patients request nPEP [odds ratio (OR) = 21.53] and the belief that nPEP would lead to antiretroviral resistance (OR = 0.14) and having a written nPEP protocol (OR = 7.49). Discussion:Our findings are consistent with earlier studies showing the underuse of nPEP as a prevention strategy. The significance of having a written nPEP protocol and of patient requests for nPEP speaks to the importance of using targeted strategies to promote widespread awareness of the use of HIV antiretroviral medications as a prevention intervention.

Cost-Utility Analysis of A Female Condom Promotion Program in Washington, DC

A retrospective economic evaluation of a female condom distribution and education program in Washington, DC. was conducted. Standard methods of cost, threshold and cost–utility analysis were utilized as recommended by the U.S. Panel on cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. The overall cost of the program that distributed 200,000 female condoms and provided educational services was

Understanding HIV Care Provider Attitudes Regarding Intentions to Prescribe PrEP.

414,186 (at a total gross cost per condom used during sex of

Financial Incentives for Linkage to Care and Viral Suppression Among HIV-Positive Patients: A Randomized Clinical Trial (HPTN 065)

3.19, including educational services). The number of HIV infections that would have to be averted in order for the program to be cost-saving was 1.13 in the societal perspective and 1.50 in the public sector payor perspective. The cost-effectiveness threshold of HIV infections to be averted was 0.46. Overall, mathematical modeling analyses estimated that the intervention averted approximately 23 HIV infections (even with the uncertainty inherent in this estimate, this value appears to well exceed the necessary thresholds), and the intervention resulted in a substantial net cost savings.

Willingness to use HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis among community-recruited, older people who inject drugs in Washington, DC.

Introduction:Preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is a promising approach to reducing HIV incidence. So, garnering the support of HIV providers, who are most familiar with antiretrovirals and likely to encounter patients in HIV serodiscordant relationships, to scale-up PrEP implementation is essential. We sought to determine whether certain subgroups of HIV providers were more likely to intend to prescribe PrEP. Methods:Surveys were administered to HIV providers in Miami, Florida and Washington, District of Columbia. Composite scores were developed to measure PrEP knowledge, experience, and likelihood of prescribing. Latent class analysis was used to stratify provider attitudes toward PrEP. Results:Among 142 HIV providers, 73.2% had cared for more than 20 HIV-infected patients in the previous 3 months; 17% had ever prescribed PrEP. Latent class analysis identified 2 classes of providers (entropy, 0.904); class 1 (n = 95) found PrEP less effective and perceived barriers to prescribing it; class 2 (n = 47) perceived PrEP as moderately effective and perceived fewer barriers to prescribing it. Compared with class 2, class 1 had significantly less experience with PrEP delivery (t(22.7) = 2.88, P = 0.009) and was significantly less likely to intend to prescribe to patients with multiple sex partners (20% vs. 43%, P = 0.04) and those with a drug use history (7% vs. 24%, P = 0.001). Conclusions:Although most HIV providers found PrEP to be effective, those considering it less effective had limited knowledge and experience with PrEP and had lesser intentions to prescribe. Provider training regarding whom should receive PrEP and addressing potential barriers to PrEP provision are needed if this HIV prevention method is to be optimized.

Awareness, Willingness, and Use of Pre-exposure Prophylaxis among Men Who Have Sex with Men in Washington, DC and Miami-Dade County, FL: National HIV Behavioral Surveillance, 2011 and 2014

Importance Achieving linkage to care and viral suppression in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-positive patients improves their well-being and prevents new infections. Current gaps in the HIV care continuum substantially limit such benefits. Objective To evaluate the effectiveness of financial incentives on linkage to care and viral suppression in HIV-positive patients. Design, Setting, and Participants A large community-based clinical trial that randomized 37 HIV test and 39 HIV care sites in the Bronx, New York, and Washington, DC, to financial incentives or standard of care. Interventions Participants at financial incentive test sites who had positive test results for HIV received coupons redeemable for

Improving HIV Surveillance Data for Public Health Action in Washington, DC: A Novel Multiorganizational Data-Sharing Method

125 cash-equivalent gift cards upon linkage to care. HIV-positive patients receiving antiretroviral therapy at financial incentive care sites received

Willingness of community-recruited men who have sex with men in Washington, DC to use long-acting injectable HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis

70 gift cards quarterly, if virally suppressed. Main Outcomes and Measures Linkage to care: proportion of HIV-positive persons at the test site who linked to care within 3 months, as indicated by CD4+ and/or viral load test results done at a care site. Viral suppression: proportion of established patients at HIV care sites with suppressed viral load (<400 copies/mL), assessed at each calendar quarter. Outcomes assessed through laboratory test results reported to the National HIV Surveillance System. Results A total of 1061 coupons were dispensed for linkage to care at 18 financial incentive test sites and 39 359 gift cards were dispensed to 9641 HIV-positive patients eligible for gift cards at 17 financial incentive care sites. Financial incentives did not increase linkage to care (adjusted odds ratio, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.73-1.67; P = .65). However, financial incentives significantly increased viral suppression. The overall proportion of patients with viral suppression was 3.8% higher (95% CI, 0.7%-6.8%; P = .01) at financial incentive sites compared with standard of care sites. Among patients not previously consistently virally suppressed, the proportion virally suppressed was 4.9% higher (95% CI, 1.4%-8.5%; P = .007) at financial incentive sites. In addition, continuity in care was 8.7% higher (95% CI, 4.2%-13.2%; P < .001) at financial incentive sites. Conclusions and Relevance Financial incentives, as used in this study (HPTN 065), significantly increased viral suppression and regular clinic attendance among HIV-positive patients in care. No effect was noted on linkage to care. Financial incentives offer promise for improving adherence to treatment and viral suppression among HIV-positive patients. Trial Registration clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01152918