Recognizing and disrupting stigma in implementation of HIV prevention and care: a call to research and action

Improving measures of context in process evaluations: development and use of the Context Tracker tool

BACKGROUND

Process evaluations are increasingly integrated into randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of complex interventions to document their delivery and interactions with local systems and dynamics, helping understand observed health outcomes. Yet process evaluations often struggle to assess relevant contextual determinants, leaving much of the important role of "context" in shaping an intervention's mechanisms opaque in many studies. A lack of easily adapted data collection methods to help define and operationalise indicators of context likely contributes to this.

METHODS

We present a method to help structure measures of context in process evaluations and describe its use in two very different settings. The "Context Tracker" is an innovative tool for use within trials and quasi-experiments to more systematically capture and understand key dimensions of context. It was developed in Zimbabwe as part of a cluster randomised controlled trial and then adapted for a quasi-experimental evaluation in the UK. Both studies provided harm reduction and health services for marginalised and hard-to-reach populations.

RESULTS

We developed the Context Tracker to be both standardised (i.e. formatted and applied in the same way across study sites) and flexible enough to allow unique features to be explored in greater detail. Drawing on the Context and Implementation of Complex Interventions (CICI) and Risk Environments frameworks, we mapped 5 domains across micro, meso and macro levels in a simple table and used existing evidence and experience to predict factors likely to affect delivery of and participation in intervention components. We tracked these over time across study sites using routine programme statistics, observation and qualitative methods. The Context Tracker enables identification and comparison of facilitators and barriers to implementation, variations in engagement with interventions, and how mechanisms of action are (or are not) triggered in different settings.

CONCLUSIONS

The Context Tracker is one example of how evidence-based contextual determinants can be used to guide data collection and analysis within process evaluations. It is relevant in low- and high-income settings and applicable to both qualitative and quantitative analyses. While perhaps most useful to process evaluations of complex interventions targeting marginalised communities, the broader approach would benefit a more general research audience.

Using an intersectionality lens to explore barriers and enablers to hepatitis C point-of-care testing: a qualitative study among people who inject drugs and service providers

BACKGROUND

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is a significant global health burden, particularly among people who inject drugs. Rapid point-of-care HCV testing has emerged as a promising approach to improve HCV detection and linkage to care in harm reduction organizations such as needle and syringe programs. The objective of this study was to use an intersectionality lens to explore the barriers and enablers to point-of-care HCV testing in a needle and syringe program.

METHODS

A qualitative study was conducted using semi-structured interviews with clients (people who inject drugs) and service providers in a large community organization focused on the prevention of sexually transmitted and blood borne infections and harm reduction in Montreal, Canada. An intersectionality lens was used alongside the Theoretical Domains Framework to guide the formulation of research questions as well as data collection, analysis, and interpretation.

RESULTS

We interviewed 27 participants (15 clients, 12 providers). For clients, four themes emerged: (1) understanding and perceptions of HCV testing, (2) the role of an accessible and inclusive environment, (3) the interplay of emotions and motivations in decision-making, and (4) the impact of intersectional stigma related to HCV, behaviors, and identities. For providers, five themes emerged: (1) knowledge, skills, and confidence for HCV testing, (2) professional roles and their intersection with identity and lived experience, (3) resources and integration of services, (4) social and emotional factors, and (5) behavioral regulation and incentives for HCV testing. Intersectional stigma amplified access, emotional and informational barriers to HCV care for clients. In contrast, identity and lived experience acted as powerful enablers for providers in the provision of HCV care.

CONCLUSION

The application of an intersectionality lens provides a nuanced understanding of multilevel barriers and enablers to point-of-care HCV testing. Findings underscore the need for tailored strategies that address stigma, improve provider roles and communication, and foster an inclusive environment for equitable HCV care. Using an intersectionality lens in implementation research can offer valuable insights, guiding the design of equity-focused implementation strategies.

Access to Federally Qualified Health Centers and HIV Outcomes in the U.S. South

INTRODUCTION

Federally Qualified Health Centers may increase access to HIV prevention, care, and treatment for at-risk populations.

METHODS

A pooled cross section of ZIP Code Tabulation Areas from cites in the U.S. South with high HIV diagnoses were used to examine Federally Qualified Health Center density and indicators of HIV epidemic control. The explanatory variable was Federally Qualified Health Center density-number of Federally Qualified Health Centers in a ZIP Code Tabulation Areas' Primary Care Service Area per low-income population-high versus medium/low (2019). Outcomes were 5-year (2015-2019 or 2014-2018) (1) number of new HIV diagnoses, (2) percentage late diagnosis, (3) percentage linked to care, and (4) percentage virally suppressed, which was assessed over 1 year (2018 or 2019). Multiple linear regression was used to examine the relationship, including ZIP Code Tabulation Area-level sociodemographic and city-level HIV funding variables, with state-fixed effects, and data analysis was completed in 2022-2023. Sensitivity analyses included (1) examining ZIP Code Tabulation Areas with fewer non-Federally Qualified Health Center primary care providers, (2) controlling for county-level primary care provider density, (3) excluding the highest HIV prevalence ZIP Code Tabulation Areas, and (4) excluding Florida ZIP Code Tabulation Areas.

RESULTS

High-density ZIP Code Tabulation Areas had a lower percentage of late diagnosis and virally suppressed, a higher percentage linked to care, and no differences in new HIV diagnoses (p<0.05). In adjusted analysis, high density was associated with a greater number of new diagnoses (number or percentage=5.65; 95% CI=2.81, 8.49), lower percentage of late diagnosis (-3.71%; 95% CI= -5.99, -1.42), higher percentage linked to care (2.13%; 95% CI=0.20, 4.06), and higher percentage virally suppressed (1.87%; 95% CI=0.53, 2.74) than medium/low density.

CONCLUSIONS

Results suggest that access to Federally Qualified Health Centers may benefit community-level HIV epidemic indicators.

Preexposure prophylaxis availability among health facilities participating in the global International epidemiology Databases to Evaluate AIDS (IeDEA) consortium

BACKGROUND

While recognized as a key HIV prevention strategy, preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) availability and accessibility are not well documented globally. We aimed to describe PrEP drug registration status and the availability of PrEP services across HIV care sites participating in the International epidemiology Databases to Evaluate AIDS (IeDEA) research consortium.

METHODS

We used country-level PrEP drug registration status from the AIDS Vaccine Advocacy Coalition and data from IeDEA surveys conducted in 2014, 2017 and 2020 among participating HIV clinics in seven global regions. We used descriptive statistics to assess PrEP availability across IeDEA sites serving adult patients in 2020 and examined trends in PrEP availability among sites that responded to all three surveys.

RESULTS

Of 199 sites that completed the 2020 survey, PrEP was available in 161 (81%). PrEP availability was highest at sites in North America (29/30; 97%) and East Africa (70/74; 95%) and lowest at sites in Central (10/20; 50%) and West Africa (1/6; 17%). PrEP availability was higher among sites in countries where PrEP was officially registered (146/161; 91%) than where it was not (14/32; 44%). Availability was higher at health centers (109/120; 90%) and district hospitals (14/16; 88%) compared to regional/teaching hospitals (36/63). Among the 94 sites that responded to all three surveys, PrEP availability increased from 47% in 2014 to 60% in 2017 and 76% in 2020.

CONCLUSION

PrEP availability has substantially increased since 2014 and is now available at most IeDEA sites. However, PrEP service provision varies markedly across global regions.

Missed Opportunities When We Focus only on Risk: Using the Concerns Based Conversation Starter to Identify Potential PrEP Candidates

Collection and use of self-reported HIV sexual risk-behaviors to identify pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) candidates is common practice in PrEP providing and referral services. Critiques of this strategy highlight overreliance on self-report and contribution to ongoing PrEP stigma. As an alternative (or complimentary) approach, we evaluated a 5-item Concerns Based Conversation Starter (CBCS) that could be used to identify individuals who could benefit from PrEP. The CBCS was included in the 2019 cycle of the American Men's Internet Survey. Item responses were characterized overall and in relation to CDC risk-based PrEP indication and reported willingness to use PrEP. In total, 1606 HIV-negative men who have sex with men not on PrEP were evaluated. Of these, 50% were below the age of 25, 11% Black, 16% Latino, and 64% White. Across the sample, 61% (986) met risk-based criteria for PrEP indication, 80% (1278) were identified by the CBCS, and 52% (835) were flagged by both. The CBCS uniquely identified 28% (443) for follow-up PrEP discussions that would have been missed by a risk-based only approach. Only 9% (151) of the sample had risk-based indication but did not report concerns. Over half of those flagged by the CBCS expressed willingness to use PrEP. The CBCS identified more people than a risk-based indication approach, with most also reporting an interest in using PrEP. A small percentage of risk-indicated participants were 'missed' by the CBCS. As PrEP options and access points expand, implementation tools like the CBCS can facilitate more wide-scale, values-focused PrEP implementation.

Public health services and intersectional stigma: a social sciences perspective with implications for HIV service design and delivery

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Understanding stigma is important for improving HIV care services and gaps in HIV service delivery have been attributed to stigma. This review article synthesizes recent evidence on stigma and its implications for HIV service design and delivery. Given the intersectional nature of stigma, we will focus on HIV stigma as well as related forms of stigma based on one's race, sexual identity, gender identity and other identities.

RECENT FINDINGS

Stigma remains a barrier to achieving equity in HIV services. Individualistic measures of stigma remain influential and are associated with barriers to accessing HIV health services. Recent work also highlights stigma measured at a structural level and its impact on HIV services contexts. Individuals situated at intersections of marginalized identities continue to face greatest injustices, and although intersectional approaches have been adapted to design services at a micro level, few focus on structural change. Recent evidence for mitigating stigma indicates some success for psychosocial interventions that target internalized stigma. Furthermore, community-led approaches show promise in addressing stigma that manifests in HIV health services settings.

SUMMARY

Interventions that address individual-level stigma and structural stigma are needed. Theoretical and applied antistigma research is needed to make HIV services more equitable.