Isoniazid preventive therapy completion between July-September 2019: A comparison across HIV differentiated service delivery models in Uganda.

BACKGROUND: Tuberculosis (TB) remains the leading cause of death among people living with HIV (PLHIV). To prevent TB among PLHIV, the Ugandan national guidelines recommend Isoniazid Preventive Therapy (IPT) across differentiated service delivery (DSD) models, an effective way of delivering ART. DSD models include Community Drug Distribution Point (CDDP), Community Client-led ART Delivery (CCLAD), Facility-Based Individual Management (FBIM), Facility-Based Group (FBG), and Fast Track Drug Refill (FTDR). Little is known about the impact of delivering IPT through DSD. METHODS: We reviewed medical records of PLHIV who initiated IPT between June-September 2019 at TASO Soroti (TS), Katakwi Hospital (KH) and Soroti Regional Referral Hospital (SRRH). We defined IPT completion as completing a course of isoniazid within 6-9 months. We utilized a modified Poisson regression to compare IPT completion across DSD models and determine factors associated with IPT completion in each DSD model. RESULTS: Data from 2968 PLHIV were reviewed (SRRH: 50.2%, TS: 25.8%, KH: 24.0%); females: 60.7%; first-line ART: 91.7%; and Integrase Strand Transfer Inhibitor (INSTI)-based regimen: 61.9%. At IPT initiation, the median age and duration on ART were 41.5 (interquartile range [IQR]; 32.3-50.2) and 6.0 (IQR: 3.7-8.6) years, respectively. IPT completion overall was 92.8% (95%CI: 91.8-93.7%); highest in CDDP (98.1%, 95%CI: 95.0-99.3%) and lowest in FBG (85.8%, 95%CI: 79.0-90.7%). Compared to FBIM, IPT completion was significantly higher in CDDP (adjusted rate ratio [aRR] = 1.15, 95%CI: 1.09-1.22) and CCLAD (aRR = 1.09, 95% CI 1.02-1.16). In facility-based models, IPT completion differed between sites (p<0.001). IPT completion increased with age for FBIM and CCLAD and was lower among female participants in the CCLAD (aRR = 0.82, 95%CI 0.67-0.97). CONCLUSION: IPT completion was high overall but highest in community-based models. Our findings provide evidence that supports integration of IPT within DSD models for ART delivery in Uganda and similar settings.

Capacity of community advisory boards for effective engagement in clinical research: a mixed methods study.

BACKGROUND: Community engagement is a key component in health research. One of the ways health researchers ensure community engagement is through Community Advisory Boards (CABs). The capacity of CABs to properly perform their role in clinical research has not been well described in many resource limited settings. In this study, we assessed the capacity of CABs for effective community engagement in Uganda. METHODS: We conducted a cross sectional study with mixed methods. We used structured questionnaires and key informant interviews (KII) to collect data from CAB members, trial investigators, and community liaison officers. For quantitative data, we used descriptive statistics while for qualitative data we used content analysis. RESULTS: Seventy three CAB members were interviewed using structured questionnaires; 58.9% males, median age 49 years (IQR 24-70), 71.2% had attained tertiary education, 42.5% never attended any research ethics training, only 26% had a training in human subject protection, 30.1% had training in health research, 50.7% never attended any training about the role of CABs, and 72.6% had no guidelines for their operation. On the qualitative aspect, 24 KIIs cited CAB members to have some skills and ability to understand and review study documents, offer guidance on community norms and expectations and give valuable feedback to the investigators. However, challenges like limited resources, lack of independence and guidelines, and knowledge gaps about research ethics were cited as hindrances of CABs capacity. CONCLUSION: Though CABs have some capacity to perform their role in the Ugandan setting, their functionality is limited by lack of resources to facilitate their work, lack of independence, lack of guidelines for their operations and limited knowledge regarding issues of research ethics and protection of the rights of trial participants.