Building an Opt-Out Model for Service-Level Consent in the Context of New Data Regulations.

The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) was introduced in 2018 to harmonize data privacy and security laws across the European Union (EU). It applies to any organization collecting personal data in the EU. To date, service-level consent has been used as a proportionate approach for clinical trials, which implement low-risk, routine, service-wide interventions for which individual consent is considered inappropriate. In the context of public health research, GDPR now requires that individuals have the option to choose whether their data may be used for research, which presents a challenge when consent has been given by the clinical service and not by individual service users. We report here on development of a pragmatic opt-out solution to this consent paradox in the context of a partner notification intervention trial in sexual health clinics in the UK. Our approach supports the individual's right to withhold their data from trial analysis while routinely offering the same care to all patients.

Associations with sub-optimal clinic attendance and reasons for missed appointments among heterosexual women and men living with HIV in London.

Poor engagement in HIV care is associated with poorer health outcomes and increased mortality. Our survey examined experiential and circumstantial factors associated with clinic attendance among women (n = 250) and men (n = 106) in London with heterosexually-acquired HIV. While no associations were found for women, among men, sub-optimal attendance was associated with insecure immigration status (25.6% vs. 1.8%), unstable housing (32.6% vs. 10.2%) and reported effect of HIV on daily activities (58.7% vs. 40.0%). Among women and men on ART, it was associated with missing doses of ART (OR = 2.96, 95% CI:1.74-5.02), less belief in the necessity of ART (OR = 0.56, 95% CI:0.35-0.90) and more concern about ART (OR = 3.63, 95% CI:1.45-9.09). Not wanting to think about being HIV positive was the top reason for ever missing clinic appointments. It is important to tackle stigma and the underlying social determinants of health to improve HIV prevention, and the health and well-being of people living with HIV.

The association between use of chemsex drugs and HIV clinic attendance among gay and bisexual men living with HIV in London.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the association between chemsex drug use and HIV clinic attendance among gay and bisexual men in London. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey of adults (> 18 years) diagnosed with HIV for > 4 months, attending seven London HIV clinics (May 2014 to August 2015). Participants self-completed an anonymous questionnaire linked to clinical data. Sub-optimal clinic attenders had missed one or more HIV clinic appointments in the past year, or had a history of non-attendance for > 1 year. RESULTS: Over half (56%) of the 570 men who identified as gay or bisexual reported taking recreational drugs in the past 5 years and 71.5% of these men had used chemsex drugs in the past year. Among men reporting chemsex drug use (past year), 32.1% had injected any drugs in the past year. Sub-optimal clinic attenders were more likely than regular attenders to report chemsex drug use (past year; 46.9% vs. 33.2%, P = 0.001), injecting any drugs (past year; 17.1% vs. 8.9%, P = 0.011) and recreational drug use (past 5 years; 65.5% vs. 48.8%, P < 0.001). One in five sub-optimal attenders had missed an HIV clinic appointment because of taking recreational drugs (17.4% vs. 1.8%, P < 0.001). In multivariable logistic regression, chemsex drug use was significantly associated with sub-optimal clinic attendance (adjusted odds ratio = 1.71, 95% confidence interval: 1.10-2.65, P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings highlight the importance of systematic assessment of drug use and development of tools to aid routine assessment. We suggest that chemsex drug use should be addressed when developing interventions to improve engagement in HIV care among gay and bisexual men.

Development and application of a new measure of engagement in out-patient HIV care.

OBJECTIVES: Commonly used measures of engagement in HIV care do not take into account that the frequency of attendance is related to changes in treatment and health status. This study developed a new measure of engagement in care (EIC) incorporating clinical factors. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews with eight HIV physicians to identify factors associated with the timing of patients' next scheduled appointments. These factors informed the development of an algorithm to classify each month of follow-up as "in care" (on or before the time of the next expected attendance) or "out of care" (after the time of the next expected attendance). The EIC algorithm was applied to data from the UK Collaborative HIV Cohort (UK CHIC) study, a large clinical cohort study. RESULTS: The interviews indicated that time to next appointment varied depending on psychosocial and physical comorbidities, and clinical factors (time since diagnosis, AIDS diagnosis, treatment status, CD4 count and viral load). The resulting EIC algorithm was applied to 44 432 patients; 83.9% of the 3 021 224 person-months were "in care". Greater EIC was independently associated with older age, white ethnicity, HIV acquisition through sex between men, current use of antiretroviral therapy (ART), a higher nadir CD4 count, later calendar year and being seen at the clinic for the first time within the last year. CONCLUSIONS: This algorithm describing engagement in HIV care incorporates a time-updated measure of patients' treatment and health status. It adds to the options available for measuring this key performance indicator.