- Browse by Author
Browsing by Author "Ajeh, Rogers"
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item Availability of screening and treatment for common mental disorders in HIV clinic settings: data from the global International epidemiology Databases to Evaluate AIDS (IeDEA) Consortium, 2016–2017 and 2020(Wiley, 2023) Parcesepe, Angela M.; Stockton, Melissa; Remch, Molly; Wester, C. William; Bernard, Charlotte; Ross, Jeremy; Haas, Andreas D.; Ajeh, Rogers; Althoff, Keri N.; Enane, Leslie; Pape, William; Minga, Albert; Kwobah, Edith; Tlali, Mpho; Tanuma, Junko; Nsonde, Dominique; Freeman, Aimee; Duda, Stephany N.; Nash, Denis; Lancaster, Kathryn; IeDEA Consortium; Pediatrics, School of MedicineIntroduction: Common mental disorders (CMDs) are highly prevalent among people with HIV. Integrating mental healthcare into HIV care may improve mental health and HIV treatment outcomes. We describe the reported availability of screening and treatment for depression, anxiety and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) at global HIV treatment centres participating in the International epidemiology Databases to Evaluate AIDS (IeDEA) Consortium in 2020 and changes in availability at sites in low- or middle-income countries (LMICs) between 2016/2017 and 2020. Methods: In 2020, 238 sites contributing individual-level data to the IeDEA Consortium and in 2016/2017 a stratified random sample of IeDEA sites in LMICs were eligible to participate in site surveys on the availability of screening and treatment for CMDs. We assessed trends over time for 68 sites across 27 LMICs that participated in both surveys. Results: Among the 238 sites eligible to participate in the 2020 site survey, 227 (95%) participated, and mental health screening and treatment data were available for 223 (98%) sites across 41 countries. A total of 95 sites across 29 LMICs completed the 2016/2017 survey. In 2020, 68% of sites were in urban settings, and 77% were in LMICs. Overall, 50%, 14% and 12% of sites reported screening with a validated instrument for depression, anxiety and PTSD, respectively. Screening plus treatment in the form of counselling was available for depression, anxiety and PTSD at 46%, 13% and 11% of sites, respectively. Screening plus treatment in the form of medication was available for depression, anxiety and PTSD at 36%, 11% and 8% of sites, respectively. Among sites that participated in both surveys, screening for depression was more commonly available in 2020 than 2016/2017 (75% vs. 59%, respectively, p = 0.048). Conclusions: Reported availability of screening for depression increased among this group of IeDEA sites in LMICs between 2016/2017 and 2020. However, substantial gaps persist in the availability of mental healthcare at HIV treatment sites across global settings, particularly in resource-constrained settings. Implementation of sustainable strategies to integrate mental health services into HIV care is needed.Item Service delivery challenges in HIV care during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic: results from a site assessment survey across the global IeDEA consortium(Wiley, 2022) Brazier, Ellen; Ajeh, Rogers; Maruri, Fernanda; Musick, Beverly; Freeman, Aimee; Wester, C. William; Lee, Man-Po; Shamu, Tinei; Crabtree Ramírez, Brenda; d’Almeida, Marcelline; Wools-Kaloustian, Kara; Kumarasamy, N.; Althoff, Keri N.; Twizere, Christella; Grinsztejn, Beatriz; Tanser, Frank; Messou, Eugène; Byakwaga, Helen; Duda, Stephany N.; Nash, Denis; International epidemiology Databases to Evaluate AIDS; Biostatistics, School of Public HealthIntroduction: Interruptions in treatment pose risks for people with HIV (PWH) and threaten progress in ending the HIV epidemic; however, the COVID-19 pandemic's impact on HIV service delivery across diverse settings is not broadly documented. Methods: From September 2020 to March 2021, the International epidemiology Databases to Evaluate AIDS (IeDEA) research consortium surveyed 238 HIV care sites across seven geographic regions to document constraints in HIV service delivery during the first year of the pandemic and strategies for ensuring care continuity for PWH. Descriptive statistics were stratified by national HIV prevalence (<1%, 1-4.9% and ≥5%) and country income levels. Results: Questions about pandemic-related consequences for HIV care were completed by 225 (95%) sites in 42 countries with low (n = 82), medium (n = 86) and high (n = 57) HIV prevalence, including low- (n = 57), lower-middle (n = 79), upper-middle (n = 39) and high- (n = 50) income countries. Most sites reported being subject to pandemic-related restrictions on travel, service provision or other operations (75%), and experiencing negative impacts (76%) on clinic operations, including decreased hours/days, reduced provider availability, clinic reconfiguration for COVID-19 services, record-keeping interruptions and suspension of partner support. Almost all sites in low-prevalence and high-income countries reported increased use of telemedicine (85% and 100%, respectively), compared with less than half of sites in high-prevalence and lower-income settings. Few sites in high-prevalence settings (2%) reported suspending antiretroviral therapy (ART) clinic services, and many reported adopting mitigation strategies to support adherence, including multi-month dispensing of ART (95%) and designating community ART pick-up points (44%). While few sites (5%) reported stockouts of first-line ART regimens, 10-11% reported stockouts of second- and third-line regimens, respectively, primarily in high-prevalence and lower-income settings. Interruptions in HIV viral load (VL) testing included suspension of testing (22%), longer turnaround times (41%) and supply/reagent stockouts (22%), but did not differ across settings. Conclusions: While many sites in high HIV prevalence settings and lower-income countries reported introducing or expanding measures to support treatment adherence and continuity of care, the COVID-19 pandemic resulted in disruptions to VL testing and ART supply chains that may negatively affect the quality of HIV care in these settings.