Effect of a multicomponent, person-centred care intervention on client experience and HIV treatment outcomes in Zambia: a stepped-wedge, cluster-randomised trial.

IF 12.8 1区 医学 Q1 IMMUNOLOGY
Lancet Hiv Pub Date : 2025-01-01 Epub Date: 2024-12-05 DOI:10.1016/S2352-3018(24)00264-9
Kombatende Sikombe, Aaloke Mody, Charles W Goss, Sandra Simbeza, Laura K Beres, Jake M Pry, Ingrid Eshun-Wilson, Anjali Sharma, Njekwa Mukamba, Lloyd B Mulenga, Brian Rice, Jacob Mutale, Alida Zulu Dube, Musunge Mulabe, James Hargreaves, Carolyn Bolton Moore, Charles B Holmes, Izukanji Sikazwe, Elvin H Geng
{"title":"Effect of a multicomponent, person-centred care intervention on client experience and HIV treatment outcomes in Zambia: a stepped-wedge, cluster-randomised trial.","authors":"Kombatende Sikombe, Aaloke Mody, Charles W Goss, Sandra Simbeza, Laura K Beres, Jake M Pry, Ingrid Eshun-Wilson, Anjali Sharma, Njekwa Mukamba, Lloyd B Mulenga, Brian Rice, Jacob Mutale, Alida Zulu Dube, Musunge Mulabe, James Hargreaves, Carolyn Bolton Moore, Charles B Holmes, Izukanji Sikazwe, Elvin H Geng","doi":"10.1016/S2352-3018(24)00264-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Recipients of health services value not only convenience but also respectful, kind, and helpful providers. To date, research to improve person-centred HIV treatment has focused on making services easier to access (eg, differentiated service delivery) rather than the interpersonal experience of care. We developed and evaluated a person-centred care (PCC) intervention targeting practices of health-care workers.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using a stepped-wedge, cluster-randomised design, we randomly allocated 24 HIV clinics stratified by size in Zambia into four groups and introduced a PCC intervention that targeted caring aspects of the behaviour of health-care workers in one group every 6 months. The intervention entailed training and coaching for health-care workers on PCC practices (to capacitate), client experience assessment with feedback to facilities (to create opportunities), and small performance-based incentives (to motivate). In a probability sample of clients who were pre-trained on a client experience exit survey and masked to facility intervention status, we evaluated effects on client experience by use of mean score change and also proportion with poor encounters (ie, score of ≤8 on a 12-point survey instrument). We examined effects on missed visits (ie, >30 days late for next scheduled encounter) in all groups and retention in care at 15 months in group 1 and group 4 by use of electronic health records. We assessed effects on treatment success at 15 months (ie, HIV RNA concentration <400 copies per mL or adjudicated care status) in a prospectively enrolled subset of clients from group 1 and group 4. We estimated treatment effects with mixed-effects logistic regression, adjusting for sex, age, and baseline care status. This trial is registered at the Pan-African Clinical Trials Registry (202101847907585), and is completed.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>Between Aug 12, 2019, and Nov 30, 2021, 177 543 unique clients living with HIV made at least one visit to one of the 24 study clinics. The PCC intervention reduced the proportion of poor visits based on exit surveys from 147 (23·3%) of 632 during control periods to 33 (13·3%) of 249 during the first 6 months of intervention, and then to eight (3·5%) of 230 at 6 months or later (adjusted risk difference [aRD] for control vs ≥6 months intervention -16·9 percentage points, 95% CI -24·8 to -8·9). Among all adult scheduled appointments, the PCC intervention reduced the proportion of missed visits from 90 593 (25·3%) of 358 741 during control periods to 40 380 (22·6%) of 178 523 in the first 6 months, and then 52 288 (21·5%) of 243 350 at 6 months or later (aRD for control vs the intervention -4·2 percentage points, 95% CI -4·8 to -3·7). 15-month retention improved from 33 668 (80·2%) of 41 998 in control to 35 959 (83·6%) of 43 005 during intervention (aRD 5·9 percentage points, 95% CI 0·6 to 11·2), with larger effects in clients newly starting treatment (aRD 12·7 percentage points, 1·4 to 23·9). We found no effect on treatment success (based on viral load) in a nested subcohort (379 [83·7%] of 453 in the control phase vs 402 [83·8%] of 480 in the intervention phase; aRD 0·9 percentage points, -5·4 to 7·2).</p><p><strong>Interpretation: </strong>Improving the caring aspects of health-care worker behaviour is feasible in public health settings, enhances client experience, reduces missed appointments, and increases retention.</p><p><strong>Funding: </strong>The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.</p>","PeriodicalId":48725,"journal":{"name":"Lancet Hiv","volume":" ","pages":"e26-e39"},"PeriodicalIF":12.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Lancet Hiv","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/S2352-3018(24)00264-9","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/12/5 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"IMMUNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Recipients of health services value not only convenience but also respectful, kind, and helpful providers. To date, research to improve person-centred HIV treatment has focused on making services easier to access (eg, differentiated service delivery) rather than the interpersonal experience of care. We developed and evaluated a person-centred care (PCC) intervention targeting practices of health-care workers.

Methods: Using a stepped-wedge, cluster-randomised design, we randomly allocated 24 HIV clinics stratified by size in Zambia into four groups and introduced a PCC intervention that targeted caring aspects of the behaviour of health-care workers in one group every 6 months. The intervention entailed training and coaching for health-care workers on PCC practices (to capacitate), client experience assessment with feedback to facilities (to create opportunities), and small performance-based incentives (to motivate). In a probability sample of clients who were pre-trained on a client experience exit survey and masked to facility intervention status, we evaluated effects on client experience by use of mean score change and also proportion with poor encounters (ie, score of ≤8 on a 12-point survey instrument). We examined effects on missed visits (ie, >30 days late for next scheduled encounter) in all groups and retention in care at 15 months in group 1 and group 4 by use of electronic health records. We assessed effects on treatment success at 15 months (ie, HIV RNA concentration <400 copies per mL or adjudicated care status) in a prospectively enrolled subset of clients from group 1 and group 4. We estimated treatment effects with mixed-effects logistic regression, adjusting for sex, age, and baseline care status. This trial is registered at the Pan-African Clinical Trials Registry (202101847907585), and is completed.

Findings: Between Aug 12, 2019, and Nov 30, 2021, 177 543 unique clients living with HIV made at least one visit to one of the 24 study clinics. The PCC intervention reduced the proportion of poor visits based on exit surveys from 147 (23·3%) of 632 during control periods to 33 (13·3%) of 249 during the first 6 months of intervention, and then to eight (3·5%) of 230 at 6 months or later (adjusted risk difference [aRD] for control vs ≥6 months intervention -16·9 percentage points, 95% CI -24·8 to -8·9). Among all adult scheduled appointments, the PCC intervention reduced the proportion of missed visits from 90 593 (25·3%) of 358 741 during control periods to 40 380 (22·6%) of 178 523 in the first 6 months, and then 52 288 (21·5%) of 243 350 at 6 months or later (aRD for control vs the intervention -4·2 percentage points, 95% CI -4·8 to -3·7). 15-month retention improved from 33 668 (80·2%) of 41 998 in control to 35 959 (83·6%) of 43 005 during intervention (aRD 5·9 percentage points, 95% CI 0·6 to 11·2), with larger effects in clients newly starting treatment (aRD 12·7 percentage points, 1·4 to 23·9). We found no effect on treatment success (based on viral load) in a nested subcohort (379 [83·7%] of 453 in the control phase vs 402 [83·8%] of 480 in the intervention phase; aRD 0·9 percentage points, -5·4 to 7·2).

Interpretation: Improving the caring aspects of health-care worker behaviour is feasible in public health settings, enhances client experience, reduces missed appointments, and increases retention.

Funding: The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

多成分、以人为中心的护理干预对赞比亚客户体验和艾滋病毒治疗结果的影响:一项楔步式、集群随机试验。
背景:卫生服务的接受者看重的不仅是便利,而且是尊重、善良和乐于助人的提供者。迄今为止,改善以人为本的艾滋病毒治疗的研究侧重于使服务更容易获得(例如,差异化的服务提供),而不是人与人之间的护理体验。我们开发并评估了针对卫生保健工作者实践的以人为本的护理(PCC)干预措施。方法:采用楔形楔形聚类随机设计,我们将赞比亚按规模分层的24家艾滋病毒诊所随机分配为四组,并每6个月在一组中引入针对卫生保健工作者行为护理方面的PCC干预。干预措施包括对保健工作者进行PCC实践方面的培训和指导(使其具备能力),对客户体验进行评估并向设施提供反馈(以创造机会),以及基于绩效的小额奖励(以激励)。在客户体验退出调查预培训的客户概率样本中,我们通过使用平均得分变化和不良遭遇的比例(即在12分调查工具上得分≤8)来评估对客户体验的影响。我们通过使用电子健康记录检查了所有组中对错过就诊(即,下次预约就诊晚30天)的影响以及组1和组4在15个月时保留护理的影响。我们评估了15个月后对治疗成功的影响(即HIV RNA浓度)。研究结果:在2019年8月12日至2021年11月30日期间,177543名HIV患者至少访问了24个研究诊所中的一个。PCC干预减少了基于退出调查的不良就诊比例,从对照期的632例中的147例(23.3%)减少到干预前6个月的249例中的33例(13.3%),然后在6个月或之后减少到230例中的8例(3.5%)(对照与≥6个月干预的调整风险差[aRD] - 16.9个百分点,95% CI - 24.8至- 8.9)。在所有的成人预约中,PCC干预减少了失诊的比例,从控制期间的358 741例中的90593例(25.3%)减少到前6个月的1778 523例中的40380例(22.6%),然后在6个月或之后的2443 350例中减少了52288例(21.5%)(对照组的aRD与干预相比- 4.2个百分点,95% CI为- 4.8至- 3.7)。干预期间,15个月的保留率从对照组的41498名患者中的33668名(80.2%)提高到42005名患者中的33559名(83.6%)(标准差为5.9个百分点,95% CI为0.6至11.2),在新开始治疗的患者中效果更大(标准差为12.7个百分点,1.4至23.9)。在一个嵌套的亚队列中,我们发现对治疗成功(基于病毒载量)没有影响(对照期453人中有379人[83.7%],干预期480人中有402人[83.8%];(- 5.9个百分点,- 5.4个百分点至7.2个百分点)。解释:在公共卫生环境中,改善卫生保健工作者行为的关怀方面是可行的,可以提高客户体验,减少错过的预约,并增加保留率。资助:比尔和梅林达·盖茨基金会。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Lancet Hiv
Lancet Hiv IMMUNOLOGYINFECTIOUS DISEASES&-INFECTIOUS DISEASES
CiteScore
19.90
自引率
4.30%
发文量
368
期刊介绍: The Lancet HIV is an internationally trusted source of clinical, public health, and global health knowledge with an Impact Factor of 16.1. It is dedicated to publishing original research, evidence-based reviews, and insightful features that advocate for change in or illuminates HIV clinical practice. The journal aims to provide a holistic view of the pandemic, covering clinical, epidemiological, and operational disciplines. It publishes content on innovative treatments and the biological research behind them, novel methods of service delivery, and new approaches to confronting HIV/AIDS worldwide. The Lancet HIV publishes various types of content including articles, reviews, comments, correspondences, and viewpoints. It also publishes series that aim to shape and drive positive change in clinical practice and health policy in areas of need in HIV. The journal is indexed by several abstracting and indexing services, including Crossref, Embase, Essential Science Indicators, MEDLINE, PubMed, SCIE and Scopus.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信