One size does not fit all: Preferences for HIV care delivery among out-of-care people living with HIV in the Southeastern United States.

Approximately half of the people with HIV (PWH) in the United States are retained in HIV care and only 57% have achieved viral suppression, due to barriers including transportation access, stigma, poor mental health, substance use, and medical mistrust. Community-based HIV care models have potential to address the diverse needs of patients and to improve retention in care, but their success is contingent on acceptance by patients and key community stakeholders. Recognizing that the preferences of PWH who are out-of-care (PWH-OOC) likely differ from those retained in care, we conducted a mixed-methods study from June 2019 to May 2021 composed of surveys with PWH-OOC (n = 50) and in-depth interviews with key clinic and community stakeholders (n = 41) to examine the relative preference and perceived advantages and disadvantages for six different community-based HIV care models versus the traditional fixed-clinic model. Survey data was analyzed to assess average rank preference for each care model and interview transcripts were thematically coded to examine factors influencing model acceptance. The highest preference for care delivery was via a mobile clinic, followed by community-based peer navigation, primary care clinics, telemedicine, traditional HIV subspeciality clinic, homeless shelter, and drug treatment center. Common factors influencing preference included convenience, accessibility, potential to preserve confidentiality, quality of care assurance, opportunity to develop rapport with their HIV care provider, access to a smart device, and potential to alleviate versus exacerbate HIV stigma. Participants discussed need for integration of care models and for individuals to choose different care models at different times. Providers and patients differed in preference for care model and weighting of relative advantages and disadvantages of each. Findings highlight the need to integrate alternative, community-based care models into the national plan to end the HIV epidemic and to allow for PWH-OOC to choose the model most fitting based on individual circumstances.

Reaching and Re-Engaging People Living with HIV Who Are Out of Care: A Mixed-Methods Exploration of Patient Preferences for Strategies to Enhance Clinic Communication and Outreach.

Half of all people living with HIV (PLWH) in the United States are not retained in HIV medical care. The utility of appointment reminders and clinic-based retention support services is often limited by the inability to contact PLWH who are out of care (PLWH-OOC) due to disconnected phone lines, full voice mails, and housing instability. Between June 2019 and May 2021, as part of a larger mixed-methods study in Metro Atlanta, Georgia, we conducted surveys with 50 PLWH-OOC and interviews with 13 PLWH holding a variety of clinic stakeholder roles (patients, Community Advisory Board members, and peer navigators) to explore preferences for clinic communication and peer outreach and factors impacting uptake. Although phone calls, text messages, and calling secondary contacts were most preferred, the spread of preferences was wide. Surveys and interviews highlighted the high acceptance of peer outreach visits, with trust, support, and privacy being key factors driving the uptake. Findings underscore the need for clinics to offer a suite of communication and outreach strategies and assess patient preferences for traditional and nontraditional outreach models to more effectively reach, re-engage, and ultimately retain PLWH-OOC.

Stakeholder-led design of a mobile HIV clinic model to enhance engagement and retention in HIV care in the Southern United States.

To foster retention of people living with HIV (PLWH) in HIV care in the Southern United States, we aimed to develop a stakeholder-driven mobile HIV clinic (MHC) model. From June 2019 to May 2021 we conducted a mixed-methods study: 50 surveys with out-of-care PLWH and 41 in-depth interviews with PLWH, HIV clinic staff, city officials, AIDS service organizations, and mobile clinics to examine preferences for MHC implementation. Survey data was analyzed descriptively, and interview transcripts were coded thematically. Participants recommended the MHC: (1) have nondescript exterior and HIV services nested in non-HIV care to foster confidentiality, (2) be located along public transportation and have extended hours to promote accessibility, (3) have established protocols addressing security, biosafety, and data safety; (4) provide comprehensive clinical and support services to address retention barriers; and (5) be integrated within the health system, use low-cost, diverse staffing, and establish appointment notification systems. By informing MHC design, these findings add to the toolbox of strategies that can render HIV care more accessible.

Getting Personal: How Childhood Vaccination Policies Shape the Landscape of Vaccine Exemptions.

BACKGROUND: State-mandated school entry immunization requirements in the United States play an important role in achieving high vaccine coverage, but variations in vaccine exemption policies result in a patchwork of vaccine coverage across the country. METHODS: In this study, we evaluate epidemiological effects and spatial variations in nonmedical exemption (NME) rates in the context of vaccine policies. We first analyze the correlation between NME rates and vaccine coverage for 3 significant childhood vaccinations. Furthermore, we assess the effects of policy changes in a subset of states, using a correlative approach at the state level and performing a clustering analysis at the county level. RESULTS: We find that higher rates of exemptions are associated with lower vaccination rates of school-aged children in all cases. In a subset of states where exemption policy has recently changed, we show that the effects on statewide NME rates vary widely and that decreases in NMEs can lead to an increase in other types of exemptions. Finally, our clustering analysis in California, Illinois, and Connecticut shows that policy changes affect the spatial distribution of NMEs. CONCLUSIONS: Our work suggests that vaccination policies have significant impacts on patterns of herd immunity. Our findings can be used to develop evidence-based vaccine legislation.