Clinic-level complexities prevent effective engagement of people living with HIV who are out-of-care.

Approximately half of people living with HIV (PLWH) in the United States are not retained in HIV care. Although numerous studies have identified individual-level barriers to care (i.e., substance abuse, mental health, housing, transportation challenges), less is known about institutional-level barriers. We aimed to identify clinic-level barriers to HIV care and strategies to address them to better engage PLWH who have been out of care (PLWH-OOC). As part of a larger qualitative study in a Ryan White-funded HIV Clinic in Atlanta, which aimed to understand the acceptance and feasibility of community-based HIV care models to better reach PLWH-OOC, we explored barriers and facilitators of HIV care engagement. From October 2022-March 2023, 18 in-depth-interviews were conducted with HIV-care providers, administrators, social workers, and members of a Community Advisory Board (CAB) comprised of PLWH-OOC. Transcripts were coded by trained team members using a consensus approach. Several clinic-level barriers emerged: 1) the large burden placed on patients to provide proof of eligibility to receive Ryan White Program services, 2) inflexibility of provider clinic schedules, 3) inadequate processes to identify patients at risk of disengaging from care, 4) poorly-resourced hospital-to-clinic transitions, 5) inadequate systems to address primary care needs outside of HIV care, and 6) HIV stigma among medical professionals. Strategies to address these barriers included: 1) colocation of HIV and non-HIV services, 2) community-based care options that do not require patients to navigate complex transportation systems, 3) hospital and community-based peer navigation services, 4) dedicated staffing to identify and support PLWH-OOC, and 5) enhanced systems support to help patients collect the high burden of documentation required to receive subsidized HIV care. Several systems-level HIV care barriers exist and intersect with individual and community-level barriers to disproportionately affect HIV care engagement among PLWH-OOC. Findings suggest several strategies that should be considered to reach the remaining 50% of PLWH who remain out-of-care.

Acceptability of Long-Acting Injectable Antiretroviral Therapy Among People with HIV Receiving Care at Three Ryan White Funded Clinics in the United States.

Understanding the acceptability of long-acting injectable antiretroviral therapy (LAI-ART) among people with HIV (PWH), especially priority populations, is essential for effective implementation. We conducted semi-structured interviews with patients in three Ryan White-funded HIV clinics in San Francisco, Chicago, and Atlanta. We employed maximal variation sampling across age, gender, race, ethnicity, and time living with HIV and oversampled for individuals with suboptimal clinical engagement. An 8-step hybrid deductive and inductive thematic analysis approach guided data analysis. Between August 2020 and July 2021, we conducted 72 interviews. Median age was 46 years; 28% were ciswomen, 7% transwomen, 44% Black/African-American and 35% Latinx, 43% endorsed a psychiatric diagnosis, 35% were experiencing homelessness/unstable housing, and 10% had recent substance use. Approximately 24% were sub-optimally engaged in care. We observed a spectrum of LAI-ART acceptability, ranging from enthusiasm to hesitancy to rejection. We also characterized four emergent orientations towards LAI-ART: innovator, pragmatist, deliberator, and skeptic. Overall, the majority of participants expressed favorable initial reactions towards LAI-ART. Most approached LAI-ART pragmatically, but acceptability was not static, often increasing over the course of the interview. Participants considered their HIV providers as essential for affirming personal relevance. HIV stigma, privacy concerns, and medical mistrust had varied impacts, sometimes facilitating and other times hindering personal relevance. These findings held across priority populations, specifically young adults, cis/trans women, racial/ethnic minorities, and individuals with suboptimal clinical engagement. Further research is needed to explore the transition from hypothetical acceptance to uptake and to confirm the actual benefits and drawbacks of this treatment.

RESUMEN: La aceptabilidad de la terapia antirretroviral inyectable de acción prolongada (LAI-ART, por su sigla en inglés) entre personas con VIH es esencial para una implementación efectiva. Durante el periodo de agosto de 2020 a julio de 2021, realizamos 72 entrevistas semiestructuradas con personas con VIH en clínicas públicas ubicadas en San Francisco, Chicago y Atlanta. Un análisis temático, tanto deductivo como inductivo, guio nuestra investigación. Observamos un espectro de aceptabilidad de LAI-ART que va desde el entusiasmo hasta la indecisión y el rechazo. También caracterizamos cuatro orientaciones actitudinales emergentes hacia LAI-ART: innovadora, pragmática, deliberativa y escéptica. Los participantes también señalaron la importancia de sus proveedores de VIH para validar su relevancia personal. El estigma asociado al VIH, preocupaciones sobre la privacidad y desconfianza en el sistema médico tuvieron diversos impactos, a veces facilitando y otras veces obstaculizando la relevancia personal. Entre las poblaciones prioritarias del estudio, los resultados fueron consistentes.

Perceptions of clinical care and research among African-American patients with lymphoma.

Across lymphoma subtypes, African Americans experience disparities in clinical trial enrollment and outcomes. Understanding the needs of this population can aid addressing these disparities. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 14 self-identified Black/African-American lymphoma patients to determine their perceptions and attitudes about aspects of treatment and research. Constant-comparative methods identified themes including trust in medical staff, lack of diagnosis information, interest in research, research priorities, and potentially unaddressed emotional needs. Patients trusted their doctors and desired more diagnosis information. Participants often did not consider the emotions surrounding their diagnoses and concentrated on positive attitudes during treatment. Most participants were interested in clinical trials to help future lymphoma patients. Participants suggested a range of future research topics emphasizing lymphoma etiology. Building on trusting doctor-patient relationships, expanding clinical trials information, addressing emotional needs, and aligning research objectives with patient concerns are potential strategies for increasing clinical trial enrollment among Black lymphoma patients.

Priorities for Rural Lymphoma Survivors: A Qualitative Study.

BACKGROUND: We gathered rural patient perspectives on lymphoma care and unmet needs throughout the treatment course to better understand their attitudes toward treatment and their barriers to participating in clinical research studies. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted 12 individual semi-structured telephone interviews in the spring of 2018 with lymphoma survivors from rural counties in Georgia. Patients were identified by a residential address in counties classified as rural according to the Rural-Urban Commuting Areas codes. Participants were recruited from regional patient education conferences and from current research participants at a university research hospital in Georgia. The interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim. Thematic analysis and MAXQDA, version 18.0.8, were used to facilitate a constant comparative coding process during theme development. RESULTS: The greatest barrier to care was the travel distance. The participants described difficulty navigating between local clinics and larger cancer centers. The lack of communication between the local and specialized clinics complicated the process, and participants had difficulty contacting or seeking advice from the team at the larger cancer centers. Seeking treatment from specialized clinics farther away introduced additional barriers. Most participants agreed that the use of technology was important for improved communication. Participants described lymphoma etiology, subtype-specific studies, alternative therapies, and quality of life as key research priorities. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that targeted research and interventions are necessary to address the specific needs of rural patients with and survivors of lymphoma. To address the disparity in health outcomes within rural populations, healthcare professionals and investigators can use these data to engage rural patients in treatment decision-making and research planning.

Patient and caregiver perceptions of lymphoma care and research opportunities: A qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Although the number of lymphoma survivors has increased, the needs and research priorities of survivors and their caregivers rarely are examined and addressed. Determining the needs and priorities for this population requires an assessment of the attitudes and experiences of patients and caregivers. The authors conducted a qualitative study with lymphoma survivors and their caregivers to determine care needs and research priorities. METHODS: In the first phase, 2 semistructured focus groups were conducted with 15 lymphoma survivors and their caregivers. In phase 2, a total of 19 individual semistructured telephone interviews were conducted with lymphoma survivors and their caregivers. In both phases, participants discussed cancer experiences and research priorities. All interviews were transcribed. MAXQDA software (version 18.0.8) was used for coding and identifying themes. RESULTS: The majority of participants felt disconnected from their clinical care team due to a lack of communication. Focus group participants noted a lack of information regarding diagnoses, treatment, research, and survivorship care. Participants coped with fear through strong social support and fostering relationships with their clinical care teams. Some caregivers felt completely ignored by clinicians. Participants expressed interest in research, but had difficulty finding relevant studies. Several interviewees desired holistic and survivorship-oriented research and more studies regarding quality of life and mental health. CONCLUSIONS: The results of the current study identified unmet needs in clinical care and patient-oriented research, including needs for a focus on quality of life after treatment, communication between patients and the scientific community, and emotional well-being. Health care professionals can use these data to provide care delivery, supportive services, and research that meets the needs of lymphoma survivors and their caregivers.