The role of social capital in facilitating hepatitis C treatment scale-up within a treatment-as-prevention trial in the male prison setting

Hepatitis C virus cascade of care among people who inject drugs in Australia: Factors associated with testing and treatment in a universal healthcare system

BACKGROUND

Understanding factors associated with engagement across the hepatitis C virus (HCV) cascade of care (CoC) among people who inject drugs (PWID) is critical for developing targeted interventions to enhance engagement and further HCV elimination efforts. We describe the CoC among Australian PWID, and identify factors associated with engagement at each stage.

METHODS

As part of the 2018 and 2019 Illicit Drug Reporting System, Australians who regularly inject drugs reported lifetime HCV antibody and RNA testing, treatment uptake and completion. Multivariable logistic regression identified characteristics associated with outcomes.

RESULTS

Of 1499 participants, 87% reported antibody testing. Of those, 70% reported RNA testing, of whom 60% reported being RNA positive. Among those, 76% reported initiating treatment, 78% of whom completed. Incarceration history (adjusted odds ratio 1.90; 95% confidence interval 1.28-2.82), current opioid agonist treatment (OAT) (1.99; 1.14-3.47), and recent alcohol and other drug (AOD) counselling (2.22; 1.27-3.88) were associated with antibody testing. Incarceration history (1.42; 1.07-1.87), and current OAT (2.07; 1.51-2.86) were associated with RNA testing. Current OAT (1.92; 1.22-3.03) and recent AOD counselling (1.91; 1.16-3.13) were associated with treatment uptake. Methamphetamine as drug injected most often in the last month was associated with reduced odds of antibody (0.41; 0.25-0.66) and RNA testing (0.54; 0.40-0.74), compared to heroin.

CONCLUSION

CoC engagement amongst Australian PWID is encouraging, with AOD service engagement associated with testing and treatment. Further efforts to reach those not service engaged, particularly those not receiving OAT or who predominantly inject methamphetamine, are needed to achieve HCV elimination targets.

Hepatitis C treatment as prevention in the prison setting: Assessments of acceptability of treatment scale up efforts by prison correctional and health personnel

BACKGROUND

Hepatitis C (HCV) infection is prevalent in the prison setting, with sharing of unsterile injecting equipment the most common mode of transmission in high income countries. Mathematical modelling suggests that HCV treatment scale-up could prevent onward transmission, known as treatment as prevention. Direct-acting antivirals have enabled rapid scale up of HCV treatment, underpinning the first clinical trial of treatment as prevention in the prison setting. The Surveillance and Treatment of Prisoners with hepatitis C (SToP-C) study was carried out in four correctional centres in New South Wales, Australia. This paper utilises Sekhon's Theoretical Framework of Acceptability to examine correctional, prison health, and study personnel's assessments of acceptability of HCV treatment as prevention in the prison setting.

METHODS

Correctional (n=24) and health personnel (n=17) including officers, nurses (including seven study nurses), and senior administrators across the four prisons where SToP-C was delivered, participated in interviews. This included two maximum security, one minimum security, and one women's medium/minimum security prison. Data analysis was informed by a seven-component theory of acceptability.

RESULTS

Participants reported broad acceptability of HCV treatment as prevention in the prison setting across five components of acceptability (affective attitude, burden, ethicality, perceived effectiveness, and self-efficacy). Attributes contributing to acceptability included reduced HCV prevalence within the prison, and public health benefits for the community when people are released without HCV (affective attitude). Elements which may negatively impact on acceptability included limited clinic space (burden) and lack of correctional officers' understanding of availability of equivalent healthcare in the community (ethicality). System-wide prison participation was viewed as necessary for treatment as prevention to be successful (perceived effectiveness), while nonjudgmental care was seen as instrumental to HCV treatment scale up efforts (self-efficacy).

CONCLUSION

Correctional and prison-based health personnel view HCV treatment as prevention as an acceptable health intervention. Overall, environmental issues relating to implementation (i.e., clinic space) were viewed as requiring a strategic approach to support prison-wide HCV treatment scale up.

Considering treatment-as-prevention scale-up for Australian prisons: a qualitative sub-study of expert stakeholders from the Australian 'surveillance and treatment of prisoners with hepatitis C' project (SToP-C)

Background

With direct-acting antivirals dramatically reshaping the public health response to the hepatitis C virus (HCV), prisons are set to play a critical role in elimination efforts. Despite the theoretical demonstration of HCV treatment-as-prevention in prison in mathematical modeling, limited empirical data exist. The Australian ‘Surveillance and Treatment of Prisoners with Hepatitis C’ project (SToP-C) is the world’s first trial of HCV treatment-as-prevention in prison. Drawing on interviews with HCV expert stakeholders, this paper explores the factors respondents identified as crucial to the success of future scale-up. Accounting for such perspectives matters because of the influence expert discourse has in shaping implementation.

Methods

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with nineteen HCV experts working across key policy, advocacy, research and clinical dimensions of the Australian HCV response. Data were coded using qualitative data management software (NVivo 11). Analysis proceeded via a hybrid deductive and inductive approach.

Results

Notwithstanding concerns regarding the lack of primary prevention in Australian prisons, stakeholders reported broad levels of support for the intervention and for the future scale-up of HCV treatment. A number of considerations, both external and internal to the prison system, were identified as key. The principal external factor was an enabling political-cum-policy environment; internal factors included: obtaining support from prisons’ executive and custodial staff; promoting health within a security-first institutional culture; allocating time for treatment within prisoners’ tightly regulated schedules; ensuring institutional stability during treatment given the routine movement of prisoners between prisons; prioritizing the availability of retreatment given the paucity of primary prevention; and securing sufficient clinical space for treatment.

Conclusion

The challenges to implementation are considerable, ranging from macrolevel concerns to in-prison logistical matters. Nonetheless, we argue that prisons remain an obvious setting for treatment scale-up, not only for prevention and potential elimination benefit, but for the treatment opportunities they afford a socially disadvantaged and underserved population. While noting widespread concerns among respondents regarding the paucity of primary prevention in Australian prisons, results indicate broad levels of support among expert stakeholders for HCV treatment scale-up in prison.