Implementation of Evidence-Based HIV Interventions for Gay, Bisexual, and Other Men Who Have Sex with Men

Long-Term Changes of HIV/AIDS Incidence Rate in China and the U.S. Population From 1994 to 2019: A Join-Point and Age-Period-Cohort Analysis

Although HIV caused one of the worst epidemics since the late twentieth century, China and the U.S. has made substantial progress to control the spread of HIV/AIDS. However, the trends of HIV/AIDS incidence remain unclear in both countries. Therefore, this study aimed to highlight the long-term trends of HIV/AIDS incidence by gender in China and the U.S. population. The data were retrieved from the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) database since it would be helpful to assess the impact/role of designed policies in the control of HIV/AIDS incidence in both countries. The age-period-cohort (APC) model and join-point regression analysis were employed to estimate the age-period-cohort effect and the average annual percentage change (AAPC) on HIV incidence. Between 1994 and 2019, we observed an oscillating trend of the age-standardized incidence rate (ASIR) in China and an increasing ASIR trend in the U.S. Despite the period effect in China declined for both genders after peaked in 2004, the age effect in China grew among the young (from 15–19 to 25–29) and the old age groups (from 65–69 to 75–79). Similarly, the cohort effect increased among those born in the early (from 1924–1928 to 1934–1938) and the latest birth groups (from 1979–1983 to 2004–2009). In the case of the U.S., the age effect declined after it peaked in the 25–29 age group. People born in recent birth groups had a higher cohort effect than those born in early groups. In both countries, women were less infected by HIV than men. Therefore, besides effective strategies and awareness essential to protect the young age groups from HIV risk factors, the Chinese government should pay attention to the elderly who lacked family support and were exposed to HIV risk factors.

Lessons Learned from Implementing the SHIELD Intervention: A Peer Education Intervention for People Who Use Drugs

HIV prevention and care peer education interventions have demonstrated effectiveness at changing HIV risk and care behaviors among a variety of at-risk populations in different settings. However, little is known about the implementation of this type of intervention in community-based settings. Further, there is limited information available regarding the facilitators and barriers to implementing peer education interventions in community-based settings. In this study, we explore implementation facilitators, barriers, and strategies to overcome these barriers among 12 organizations that implemented the SHIELD intervention, an evidenced-based peer education intervention for people who use drugs. Guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, we identified several facilitators and barriers at the outer, inner individuals, and intervention level of the implementation process. Future evidence-based public health programs should, in addition to addressing effectiveness, be relevant to the needs and lives of clients.

Role of Social and Sexual Network Factors in PrEP Utilization Among YMSM and Transgender Women in Chicago

Despite demonstrated efficacy, uptake of HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) remains low, particularly among high-risk demographics such as transgender women, Black men who have sex with men (BMSM), and young MSM (YMSM). Research thus far has largely focused on individual factors that may impede PrEP uptake in these demographics, leaving social network factors relatively unexplored. The present study used data collected from participants within RADAR, a longitudinal cohort study in Chicago focused on understanding the individual, dyadic, network, social, and biologic factors associated with HIV infection within YMSM. Of the 906 study participants who did not report an HIV diagnosis at baseline, 7.0% reported using PrEP in the prior 6 months. Recent PrEP use was associated with both individual-level (age and gender) and network-level factors (mean relationship strength, sexual network degree, etc.). These findings highlight the need to expand beyond focusing on individual-level drivers of PrEP uptake, as well as changing our understanding of who is most important within a network (centrality vs. strength of weak ties). Future work is needed to determine whether variables associated with PrEP uptake are similarly connected to PrEP adherence.

Local opinion leaders: effects on professional practice and healthcare outcomes

BACKGROUND

Clinical practice is not always evidence-based and, therefore, may not optimise patient outcomes. Local opinion leaders (OLs) are individuals perceived as credible and trustworthy, who disseminate and implement best evidence, for instance through informal one-to-one teaching or community outreach education visits. The use of OLs is a promising strategy to bridge evidence-practice gaps. This is an update of a Cochrane review published in 2011.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of local opinion leaders to improve healthcare professionals' compliance with evidence-based practice and patient outcomes.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, three other databases and two trials registers on 3 July 2018, together with searching reference lists of included studies and contacting experts in the field.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered randomised studies comparing the effects of local opinion leaders, either alone or with a single or more intervention(s) to disseminate evidence-based practice, with no intervention, a single intervention, or the same single or more intervention(s). Eligible studies were those reporting objective measures of professional performance, for example, the percentage of patients being prescribed a specific drug or health outcomes, or both. We included all studies independently of the method used to identify OLs.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane procedures in this review. The main comparison was (i) between any intervention involving OLs (OLs alone, OLs with a single or more intervention(s)) versus any comparison intervention (no intervention, a single intervention, or the same single or more intervention(s)). We also made four secondary comparisons: ii) OLs alone versus no intervention, iii) OLs alone versus a single intervention, iv) OLs, with a single or more intervention(s) versus the same single or more intervention(s), and v) OLs with a single or more intervention(s) versus no intervention.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 24 studies, involving more than 337 hospitals, 350 primary care practices, 3005 healthcare professionals, and 29,167 patients (not all studies reported this information). A majority of studies were from North America, and all were conducted in high-income countries. Eighteen of these studies (21 comparisons, 71 compliance outcomes) contributed to the median adjusted risk difference (RD) for the main comparison. The median duration of follow-up was 12 months (range 2 to 30 months). The results suggested that the OL interventions probably improve healthcare professionals' compliance with evidence-based practice (10.8% absolute improvement in compliance, interquartile range (IQR): 3.5% to 14.6%; moderate-certainty evidence).Results for the secondary comparisons also suggested that OLs probably improve compliance with evidence-based practice (moderate-certainty evidence): i) OLs alone versus no intervention: RD (IQR): 9.15% (-0.3% to 15%); ii) OLs alone versus a single intervention: RD (range): 13.8% (12% to 15.5%); iii) OLs, with a single or more intervention(s) versus the same single or more intervention(s): RD (IQR): 7.1% (-1.4% to 19%); iv) OLs with a single or more intervention(s) versus no intervention: RD (IQR):10.25% (0.6% to 15.75%).It is uncertain if OLs alone, or in combination with other intervention(s), may lead to improved patient outcomes (3 studies; 5 dichotomous outcomes) since the certainty of evidence was very low. For two of the secondary comparisons, the IQR included the possibility of a small negative effect of the OL intervention. Possible explanations for the occasional negative effects are, for example, the possibility that the OLs may have prioritised some outcomes, at the expense of others, or that an unaccounted outcome difference at baseline, may have given a faulty impression of a negative effect of the intervention at follow-up. No study reported on costs or cost-effectiveness.We were unable to determine the comparative effectiveness of different approaches to identifying OLs, as most studies used the sociometric method. Nor could we determine which methods used by OLs to educate their peers were most effective, as the methods were poorly described in most studies. In addition, we could not determine whether OL teams were more effective than single OLs.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Local opinion leaders alone, or in combination with other interventions, can be effective in promoting evidence-based practice, but the effectiveness varies both within and between studies.The effect on patient outcomes is uncertain. The costs and the cost-effectiveness of the intervention(s) is unknown. These results are based on heterogeneous studies differing in types of intervention, setting, and outcomes. In most studies, the role and actions of the OL were not clearly described, and we cannot, therefore, comment on strategies to enhance their effectiveness. It is also not clear whether the methods used to identify OLs are important for their effectiveness, or whether the effect differs if education is delivered by single OLs or by multidisciplinary OL teams. Further research may help us to understand how these factors affect the effectiveness of OLs.

Viral suppression and HIV transmission behaviors among hospitalized patients living with HIV

From July 2012 to January 2014, the CTN0049 study, Project HOPE (Hospital Visit as Opportunity for Prevention and Engagement for HIV-infected Drug Users) interviewed 1227 people with HIV infection from 11 hospitals in the US to determine eligibility for participation in a randomized trial. Using these screening interviews, we conducted a cross-sectional study with multivariable analysis to examine groups that are at highest risk for having a detectable viral load (VL) and engaging in HIV transmission behaviors. Viral suppression was 42.8%. Persons with a detectable VL were more likely to have sex partners who were HIV-negative or of unknown status (OR = 1.72, 95% CI = 1.22–2.38), report not cleaning needles after injecting drugs (OR = 3.13, 95% CI = 1.33–7.14), and to engage in sex acts while high on drugs or alcohol (OR = 1.85, 95% CI = 1.28–2.7) compared to their counterparts. Many hospitalized people with HIV infection are unsuppressed and more likely to engage in HIV transmission behaviors than those with viral suppression. Developing behavioral interventions targeting HIV transmission behaviors toward patients with unsuppressed HIV VLs in the hospital setting has the potential to prevent HIV transmission.

HIV leadership programming attendance is associated with PrEP and PEP awareness among young, gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men in Vancouver, Canada

BACKGROUND

Young gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (YGBM) may have reduced engagement and knowledge of HIV care and biomedical HIV prevention strategies, such as pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP), post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP), and Treatment as Prevention (TasP), compared with adult GBM. We sought to understand differences in HIV prevention awareness, health care access, and service utilization between youth (16-29 years) and adult (≥30 year) GBM, as well as factors associated with attendance in HIV leadership programming among YGBM living in the publicly funded PrEP setting of Vancouver, Canada.

METHODS

Sexually-active GBM were recruited using respondent-driven sampling (RDS) from February 2012 to February 2015. Participants completed an in-person computer-assisted self-interview every 6 months, up to February 2017, with questions on sociodemographic factors, awareness of biomedical HIV prevention strategies, and an HIV treatment optimism-skepticism scale. Participants were asked if they had ever attended either of two HIV-leadership programs designed for YGBM. Both programs involve multiple GBM-led education and social networking sessions operated by community-based organizations in Vancouver. Multivariable Glimmix confounder models assessed differences between youth and adult GBM. Among younger men, bivariate analyses examined factors associated with HIV-leadership program attendance.

RESULTS

Of 698 GBM who enrolled in the longitudinal study, 36.8% were less than 30 years old at the first study visit. After controlling for gender identification, sexual orientation, HIV status, and income in the past 6 months, younger GBM (n = 257/698) had lower awareness of biomedical HIV prevention strategies and less HIV treatment optimism compared with older GBM (n = 441/698). Among younger GBM who attended HIV-leadership programs (n = 50), greater awareness of biomedical HIV prevention strategies and higher HIV treatment optimism were reported, compared with non-attendees.

CONCLUSION

Younger GBM, who are disproportionately affected by the HIV epidemic, are less aware of new prevention technologies than older GBM, but attending peer-based HIV-leadership programs ameliorates age-disparities in HIV-prevention knowledge and treatment optimism.

Rates of prevalent and new HIV diagnoses by race and ethnicity among men who have sex with men, U.S. states, 2013-2014

PURPOSE

Men who have sex with men (MSM) bear a disproportionate burden of new and existing HIV infections in the United States, with black and Hispanic MSM facing the highest rates. A lack of data on MSM population sizes has precluded the understanding of state-level variations in these rates.

METHODS

Using a recently developed model for estimating state-level population sizes of MSM by race that synthesizes data from the American Community Survey and the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, in conjunction with Centers for Disease Control and Prevention-based HIV diagnosis data, we estimated rates of living with an HIV diagnosis (2013) and new diagnosis among MSM (2014) by state and race.

RESULTS

Nationally, state-level median prevalence of living with an HIV diagnosis was 10.6%. White MSM had lower prevalence in all but five states; black MSM were higher in all but three. Hispanic MSM had highest concentrations in Northeast and Mississippi Delta states. Patterns were similar for new diagnoses rates.

CONCLUSIONS

Results suggest that racial disparities in HIV infection among MSM are more prominent than geographic ones. Interventions should be differentially tailored to areas of high proportionate and absolute burden. Continued efforts to understand and address racial differences in HIV infection are needed.