Results from a rapid national assessment of services for the prevention of mother-to-child transmission of HIV in Côte d'Ivoire.

INTRODUCTION: Loss-to-follow-up (LTFU) in the prevention of mother-to-child HIV transmission (PMTCT) programmes can occur at multiple stages of antenatal and follow-up care. This paper presents findings from a national assessment aimed at identifying major bottlenecks in Côte d'Ivoire's PMTCT cascade, and to distinguish characteristics of high- and low-performing health facilities. METHODS: This cross-sectional study, based on a nationally representative sample of 30 health facilities in Côte d'Ivoire used multiple data sources (registries, patient charts, patient booklets, interviews) to determine the magnitude of LTFU in PMTCT services. A composite measure of retention - based on child prophylaxis, maternal treatment and infant testing - was used to identify high- and low-performing sites and determine significant differences using Student's t-tests. RESULTS: Among 1,741 pregnant women newly recorded as HIV-positive between June 2011 and May 2012, 43% had a CD4 count taken, 77% received appropriate prophylaxis and 70% received prophylaxis intended for their infant. During that time, 1,054 first infant HIV tests were recorded. A conservative rate of adherence to antiretroviral therapy was estimated at 50% (n=219 patient charts). Significant differences between high- and low-performing sites included: duration of time elapsed between HIV testing and CD4 results (29.5 versus 56.3 days, p=0.001); and density (number per 100 first antenatal care visits) of full-time physicians (6.7 versus 1.7, p=0.04), laboratory technicians (2.3 versus 0.7, p=0.046), staff trained in PMTCT (10.7 versus 4.7, p=0.01), and staff performing patient follow-up activities (7.9 versus 2.5, p=0.02). Key informants highlighted staff presence and training, the availability of medical supplies and equipment (i.e., on-site CD4 machine), and the adequacy of infrastructure (i.e., space and ventilation) as perceived key factors positively and negatively impacting retention in care. CONCLUSIONS: Patient LTFU occurred throughout the PMTCT cascade from maternal to infant testing, with retention scores ranging from 0.10 to 0.83. Sites that scored higher had more dedicated and trained frontline health workers, and emphasised patient follow-up through outreach and the reduction of delays in care. Strategies to improve patient retention and decrease transmission should emphasise patient tracking systems that utilise critical human resources to both improve data quality and increase direct patient follow-up.

Evaluation of a Systems Analysis and Improvement Approach to Optimize Prevention of Mother-To-Child Transmission of HIV Using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research.

BACKGROUND: Despite large investments to prevent mother-to-child-transmission (PMTCT), pediatric HIV elimination goals are not on track in many countries. The Systems Analysis and Improvement Approach (SAIA) study was a cluster randomized trial to test whether a package of systems engineering tools could strengthen PMTCT programs. We sought to (1) define core and adaptable components of the SAIA intervention, and (2) explain the heterogeneity in SAIA's success between facilities. METHODS: The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) guided all data collection efforts. CFIR constructs were assessed in focus group discussions and interviews with study and facility staff in 6 health facilities (1 high-performing and 1 low-performing site per country, identified by study staff) in December 2014 at the end of the intervention period. SAIA staff identified the intervention's core and adaptable components at an end-of-study meeting in August 2015. Two independent analysts used CFIR constructs to code transcripts before reaching consensus. RESULTS: Flow mapping and continuous quality improvement were the core to the SAIA in all settings, whereas the PMTCT cascade analysis tool was the core in high HIV prevalence settings. Five CFIR constructs distinguished strongly between high and low performers: 2 in inner setting (networks and communication, available resources) and 3 in process (external change agents, executing, reflecting and evaluating). DISCUSSION: The CFIR is a valuable tool to categorize elements of an intervention as core versus adaptable, and to understand heterogeneity in study implementation. Future intervention studies should apply evidence-based implementation science frameworks, like the CFIR, to provide salient data to expand implementation to other settings.