Using Principles of an Adaptation Framework to Adapt a Transdiagnostic Psychotherapy for People With HIV to Improve Mental Health and HIV Treatment Engagement: Focus Groups and Formative Research Study.

BACKGROUND: HIV treatment engagement is critical for people with HIV; however, behavioral health comorbidities and HIV-related stigma are key barriers to engagement. Treatments that address these barriers and can be readily implemented in HIV care settings are needed. OBJECTIVE: We presented the process for adapting transdiagnostic cognitive behavioral psychotherapy, the Common Elements Treatment Approach (CETA), for people with HIV receiving HIV treatment at a Southern US HIV clinic. Behavioral health targets included posttraumatic stress, depression, anxiety, substance use, and safety concerns (eg, suicidality). The adaptation also included ways to address HIV-related stigma and a component based on Life-Steps, a brief cognitive behavioral intervention to support patient HIV treatment engagement. METHODS: We applied principles of the Assessment, Decision, Administration, Production, Topical Experts, Integration, Training, Testing model, a framework for adapting evidence-based HIV interventions, and described our adaptation process, which included adapting the CETA manual based on expert input; conducting 3 focus groups, one with clinic social workers (n=3) and 2 with male (n=3) and female (n=4) patients to obtain stakeholder input for the adapted therapy; revising the manual according to this input; and training 2 counselors on the adapted protocol, including a workshop held over the internet followed by implementing the therapy with 3 clinic patients and receiving case-based consultation for them. For the focus groups, all clinic social workers were invited to participate, and patients were referred by clinic social workers if they were adults receiving services at the clinic and willing to provide written informed consent. Social worker focus group questions elicited reactions to the adapted therapy manual and content. Patient focus group questions elicited experiences with behavioral health conditions and HIV-related stigma and their impacts on HIV treatment engagement. Transcripts were reviewed by 3 team members to catalog participant commentary according to themes relevant to adapting CETA for people with HIV. Coauthors independently identified themes and met to discuss and reach a consensus on them. RESULTS: We successfully used principles of the Assessment, Decision, Administration, Production, Topical Experts, Integration, Training, Testing framework to adapt CETA for people with HIV. The focus group with social workers indicated that the adapted therapy made conceptual sense and addressed common behavioral health concerns and practical and cognitive behavioral barriers to HIV treatment engagement. Key considerations for CETA for people with HIV obtained from social worker and patient focus groups were related to stigma, socioeconomic stress, and instability experienced by the clinic population and some patients' substance use, which can thwart the stability needed to engage in care. CONCLUSIONS: The resulting brief, manualized therapy is designed to help patients build skills that promote HIV treatment engagement and reduce symptoms of common behavioral health conditions that are known to thwart HIV treatment engagement.

Data for Care (D4C) Alabama: Clinic-Wide Risk Stratification With Enhanced Personal Contacts for Retention in HIV Care via the Alabama Quality Management Group.

BACKGROUND: The Alabama Quality Management Group (AQMG), a consortium of 9 Ryan White-funded part C and D clinics, distributed statewide was established in 2006 under the guidance from the Health and Resources Services Administration with a clinical quality improvement (CQI) focus. METHODS: We describe the origins and evolution of the AQMG, including requisite shifts from aggregate clinic-wide to de-identified individual-level data reporting for implementation of the Data for Care (D4C-AL) Alabama program. The D4C-AL strategy uses a clinic-wide risk stratification of all patients based on missed clinic visits in the previous 12 months. Intermediate (1-2 missed visits) and high-risk patients (>3 missed visits) receive the evidence-informed Retention through Enhanced Personal Contact intervention. We report on a pilot of the D4CAL program in 4 of 33 primary HIV care clinics at the UAB 1917 Clinic. RESULTS: Among 3859 patients seen between April 2018 and February 2019, the missed visit rate was not significantly different between the D4C-1917 (19.2%) and non-D4C clinics (20.5%) in a preintervention period (May 2017-April 2018). However, a significantly lower missed visit rate was observed in the D4C-1917 vs. non-D4C-1917 clinics during the intervention period (April 2018-February 2019, P = 0.049). CONCLUSIONS: The AQMG has been transformed into a health service research and implementation science platform, building on a shared vision, mission, data reporting, and quality improvement focus. Moreover, CQI may be viewed as an implementation strategy that seeks to enhance uptake and sustained use of effective interventions with D4C-AL representing a prototype for future initiatives embedded within extant quality improvement consortia.

Underutilization of the AIDS Drug Assistance Program: associated factors and policy implications.

BACKGROUND: The AIDS Drug Assistance Program (ADAP) provides antiretroviral medications to low-income individuals with HIV infection. METHODS: A prospective cohort study of ADAP utilization, measured using medication possession ratio (MPR), was conducted during the 2008 calendar year at the University of Alabama at Birmingham 1917 HIV Clinic. Multivariable ordinal logistic regression evaluated factors associated with ADAP utilization. RESULTS: Among 245 patients, MPR quartiles (Q) were the following: Q1<69 percent, Q2=69-83 percent, Q3=84-93 percent, Q4>93 percent. In ordinal logistic regression, younger age (OR=0.59 per 10 years; 95 percent CI=0.44-0.79), nonwhite males (2.18; 1.18-4.04), lower CD4 count (2.79 for <200 cells/mm(3) ; 1.44-5.43), and a history of alcohol abuse (2.11; 1.02-4.37) were associated with poor ADAP utilization. CONCLUSIONS: One quarter of ADAP enrollees had MPR below 69 percent, a level well below that associated with optimal HIV treatment outcomes, indicating a need for programmatic interventions to improve ADAP utilization.