Cross-sectional study to assess depression among healthcare workers in Lusaka, Zambia during the COVID-19 pandemic.

OBJECTIVES: We sought to assess depression among healthcare workers (HCWs) in the context of COVID-19 in Lusaka Province, Zambia. DESIGN: This cross-sectional study is nested within a larger study, the Person-Centred Public Health for HIV Treatment in Zambia (PCPH), a cluster-randomised trial to assess HIV care and outcomes. SETTING: The research was conducted in 24 government-run health facilities from 11 August to 15 October 2020 during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in Lusaka, Zambia. PARTICIPANTS: We used convenience sampling to recruit HCW participants who were previously enrolled in the PCPH study, had more than 6 months' experience working at the facility and were voluntarily willing to participate. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES: We implemented the well-validated 9-question Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) to assess HCW depression. We used mixed-effects, adjusted Poisson regression to estimate the marginal probability of HCWs experiencing depression that may warrant intervention (PHQ-9 score ≥5) by healthcare facility. RESULTS: We collected PHQ-9 survey responses from 713 professional and lay HCWs. Overall, 334 (46.8%, 95% CI 43.1%, 50.6%) HCWs recorded a PHQ-9 score ≥5, indicating the need for further assessment and potential intervention for depression. We identified significant heterogeneity across facilities and observed a greater proportion of HCWs with symptoms of depression in facilities providing COVID-19 testing and treatment services. CONCLUSIONS: Depression may be a concern for a large proportion of HCWs in Zambia. Further work to understand the magnitude and aetiologies of depression among HCWs in the public sector is needed to design effective prevention and treatment interventions to meet the needs for mental health support and to minimise poor health outcomes.

HIV care experiences and health priorities during the first wave of COVID-19: clients' perspectives - a qualitative study in Lusaka, Zambia.

BACKGROUND: The novel COVID-19 pandemic threatened to disrupt access to human immunodeficiency (HIV) treatment for persons living with HIV (PLHIV), two-thirds of whom live in sub-Saharan Africa. To inform a health system response supportive of continuity of care, we sought to understand clients' HIV care experiences and health priorities during the first wave of COVID-19 outbreak in Lusaka, Zambia. METHODS: Leveraging a study cohort of those who completed periodic SMS surveys on HIV care, we purposefully sampled 25 PLHIV after first confirmed COVID-19 case was reported in Zambia on 18th March 2020. We phone-interviewed participants, iteratively refining interview guide to capture emergent themes on COVID-19 awareness, health facility interactions, and social circumstances, which we analyzed using matrix analysis. RESULTS: All participants were aware of COVID-19, and HIV care experiences and health priorities of clients were affected by associated changes at health system, household, and individual level. The health system instituted early clinic visits to provide 6-months of antiretroviral therapy (ART) for stable patients and 3-months for unstable patients to reduce clinic visits and wait times. Most patients welcomed this long-desired extended appointment spacing. Some reported feeling respected and engaged when health care workers telephoned requesting their early clinic visit. However, others felt discouraged by an absence of physical distancing during their clinic visit due to 'severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2' (SARS-CoV-2) infection concerns. Several expressed a lack of clarity regarding next viral load monitoring date and means for receiving results. Patients suggested regular patient-facility communication by telephone and SMS. Patients emphasized that COVID-19 restrictions led to loss of employment and household income, exacerbating poverty and difficulties in taking ART. At individual level, most participants felt motivated to stay healthy during COVID-19 by ART adherence and regular laboratory monitoring. CONCLUSIONS: Clients' HIV care and health priorities during the first wave of COVID-19 in Lusaka province were varied with a combination of positive and negative experiences that occurred especially at health system and individual levels, while at household level, the experiences were all negative. More research is needed to understand how patients practice resiliency in the widespread context of socio-economic instability. Governments and patients must work together to find local, health systems solutions to support ART adherence and monitoring. Additionally, the health system should consider how to build on changes for long-term HIV management and service delivery.

Evaluation of HIV treatment outcomes with reduced frequency of clinical encounters and antiretroviral treatment refills: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Global HIV treatment programs have sought to lengthen the interval between clinical encounters for people living with HIV (PLWH) who are established on antiretroviral treatment (ART) to reduce the burden of seeking care and to decongest health facilities. The overall effect of reduced visit frequency on HIV treatment outcomes is however unknown. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the effect of implementation strategies that reduce the frequency of clinical appointments and ART refills for PLWH established on ART. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We searched databases​ between 1 January 2010 and 9 November 2021 to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies that compared reduced (6- to 12-monthly) clinical consultation or ART refill appointment frequency to 3- to 6-monthly appointments for patients established on ART. We assessed methodological quality and real-world relevance, and used Mantel-Haenszel methods to generate pooled risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals for retention, viral suppression, and mortality. We evaluated heterogeneity quantitatively and qualitatively, and overall evidence certainty using GRADE. Searches yielded 3,955 records, resulting in 10 studies (6 RCTs, 3 observational studies, and 1 study contributing observational and RCT data) representing 15 intervention arms with 33,599 adults (≥16 years) in 8 sub-Saharan African countries. Reduced frequency clinical consultations occurred at health facilities, while reduced frequency ART refills were delivered through facility or community pharmacies and adherence groups. Studies were highly pragmatic, except for some study settings and resources used in RCTs. Among studies comparing reduced clinical consultation frequency (6- or 12-monthly) to 3-monthly consultations, there appeared to be no difference in retention (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.97-1.04, p = 0.682, 8 studies, low certainty), and this finding was consistent across 6- and 12-monthly consultation intervals and delivery strategies. Viral suppression effect estimates were markedly influenced by under-ascertainment of viral load outcomes in intervention arms, resulting in inconclusive evidence. There was similarly insufficient evidence to draw conclusions on mortality (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.75-1.66, p = 0.592, 6 studies, very low certainty). For ART refill frequency, there appeared to be little to no difference in retention (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.98-1.06, p = 0.473, 4 RCTs, moderate certainty) or mortality (RR 1.45, 95% CI 0.63-3.35, p = 0.382, 4 RCTs, low certainty) between 6-monthly and 3-monthly visits. Similar to the analysis for clinical consultations, although viral suppression appeared to be better in 3-monthly arms, effect estimates were markedly influence by under-ascertainment of viral load outcomes in intervention arms, resulting in overall inclusive evidence. This systematic review was limited by the small number of studies available to compare 12- versus 6-monthly clinical consultations, insufficient data to compare implementation strategies, and lack of evidence for children, key populations, and low- and middle-income countries outside of sub-Saharan Africa. CONCLUSIONS: Based on this synthesis, extending clinical consultation intervals to 6 or 12 months and ART dispensing intervals to 6 months appears to result in similar retention to 3-month intervals, with less robust conclusions for viral suppression and mortality. Future research should ensure complete viral load outcome ascertainment, as well as explore mechanisms of effect, outcomes in other populations, and optimum delivery and monitoring strategies to ensure widespread applicability of reduced frequency visits across settings.

Selfie consents, remote rapport, and Zoom debriefings: collecting qualitative data amid a pandemic in four resource-constrained settings.

In-person interactions have traditionally been the gold standard for qualitative data collection. The COVID-19 pandemic required researchers to consider if remote data collection can meet research objectives, while retaining the same level of data quality and participant protections. We use four case studies from the Philippines, Zambia, India and Uganda to assess the challenges and opportunities of remote data collection during COVID-19. We present lessons learned that may inform practice in similar settings, as well as reflections for the field of qualitative inquiry in the post-COVID-19 era. Key challenges and strategies to overcome them included the need for adapted researcher training in the use of technologies and consent procedures, preparation for abbreviated interviews due to connectivity concerns, and the adoption of regular researcher debriefings. Participant outreach to allay suspicions ranged from communicating study information through multiple channels to highlighting associations with local institutions to boost credibility. Interviews were largely successful, and contained a meaningful level of depth, nuance and conviction that allowed teams to meet study objectives. Rapport still benefitted from conventional interviewer skills, including attentiveness and fluency with interview guides. While differently abled populations may encounter different barriers, the included case studies, which varied in geography and aims, all experienced more rapid recruitment and robust enrollment. Reduced in-person travel lowered interview costs and increased participation among groups who may not have otherwise attended. In our view, remote data collection is not a replacement for in-person endeavours, but a highly beneficial complement. It may increase accessibility and equity in participant contributions and lower costs, while maintaining rich data collection in multiple study target populations and settings.