The Impact of the Common Elements Treatment Approach on HIV Treatment Outcomes Among Women Experiencing Intimate Partner Violence in South Africa: A Randomized Trial

IF 5.2 1区 医学 Q2 IMMUNOLOGY
Matthew P. Fox, Jeremy C. Kane, Sithabile Mngadi-Ncube, Amy Zheng, Kristina Metz, Pertunia Manganye, Lawrence Long, Ross Greener, Srishti Sardana, Taylor Allen, Donald M. Thea, Bridgette Goeieman, Marnie Vujovic, Laura K. Murray, Sophie Pascoe
{"title":"The Impact of the Common Elements Treatment Approach on HIV Treatment Outcomes Among Women Experiencing Intimate Partner Violence in South Africa: A Randomized Trial","authors":"Matthew P. Fox,&nbsp;Jeremy C. Kane,&nbsp;Sithabile Mngadi-Ncube,&nbsp;Amy Zheng,&nbsp;Kristina Metz,&nbsp;Pertunia Manganye,&nbsp;Lawrence Long,&nbsp;Ross Greener,&nbsp;Srishti Sardana,&nbsp;Taylor Allen,&nbsp;Donald M. Thea,&nbsp;Bridgette Goeieman,&nbsp;Marnie Vujovic,&nbsp;Laura K. Murray,&nbsp;Sophie Pascoe","doi":"10.1002/jia2.70172","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Introduction</h3>\n \n <p>In South Africa, which has the world's highest prevalence of HIV, intimate partner violence (IPV) and common mental health conditions are barriers to retention in HIV treatment and achieving viral suppression. The Common Elements Treatment Approach (CETA), a cognitive-behavioural-therapy-based intervention designed for lay healthcare worker delivery, is effective in reducing mental and behavioural health problems but has not been trialled for effectiveness in improving HIV outcomes. We conducted a randomized control trial to evaluate the effectiveness of CETA in improving HIV treatment outcomes among women experiencing IPV in South Africa.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>This was a single-blind trial conducted among women living with HIV on antiretroviral therapy (ART) who experienced sexual and/or physical IPV in the last 12 months and had either an unsuppressed viral load or were at risk for poor medication adherence in the past year (e.g. defaulted on treatment, late or missed clinic visit). Women were randomized 1:1 to receive either 8–12 CETA counselling sessions or weekly safety text messages. The primary outcome was viral suppression (<span>≤</span>50 copies/mL) (which requires retention) at 12 months after baseline, which was evaluated using routinely collected medical records. A linear regression model was estimated to calculate risk differences and 95% confidence intervals (CI).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Participants were enrolled from 11 November 2021 to 19 July 2023, with 202 women randomized to CETA and 197 randomized to the control arm. Median age was 41.0 years (interquartile range [IQR]: 34.0, 47.0) with a median time on ART of 8.2 years (IQR: 4.3, 12.5). Receiving CETA was associated with a 1-percentage point (95% CI: −0.11, 0.09) decrease in retention and viral suppression compared to the control. When restricted to individuals who completed CETA (<i>N</i> = 144) compared to all controls, we observed a 7-percentage point (95% CI: −0.03, 0.18) increase in retention and viral suppression.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>Our estimates suggest overall there was no meaningful difference in retention and viral suppression at 12 months between individuals who received CETA compared to individuals who received the active safety control. Future work should seek to determine if CETA can be effective among those who complete the intervention.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":201,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the International AIDS Society","volume":"29 8","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.2000,"publicationDate":"2026-07-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13402931/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the International AIDS Society","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jia2.70172","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"IMMUNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction

In South Africa, which has the world's highest prevalence of HIV, intimate partner violence (IPV) and common mental health conditions are barriers to retention in HIV treatment and achieving viral suppression. The Common Elements Treatment Approach (CETA), a cognitive-behavioural-therapy-based intervention designed for lay healthcare worker delivery, is effective in reducing mental and behavioural health problems but has not been trialled for effectiveness in improving HIV outcomes. We conducted a randomized control trial to evaluate the effectiveness of CETA in improving HIV treatment outcomes among women experiencing IPV in South Africa.

Methods

This was a single-blind trial conducted among women living with HIV on antiretroviral therapy (ART) who experienced sexual and/or physical IPV in the last 12 months and had either an unsuppressed viral load or were at risk for poor medication adherence in the past year (e.g. defaulted on treatment, late or missed clinic visit). Women were randomized 1:1 to receive either 8–12 CETA counselling sessions or weekly safety text messages. The primary outcome was viral suppression (≤50 copies/mL) (which requires retention) at 12 months after baseline, which was evaluated using routinely collected medical records. A linear regression model was estimated to calculate risk differences and 95% confidence intervals (CI).

Results

Participants were enrolled from 11 November 2021 to 19 July 2023, with 202 women randomized to CETA and 197 randomized to the control arm. Median age was 41.0 years (interquartile range [IQR]: 34.0, 47.0) with a median time on ART of 8.2 years (IQR: 4.3, 12.5). Receiving CETA was associated with a 1-percentage point (95% CI: −0.11, 0.09) decrease in retention and viral suppression compared to the control. When restricted to individuals who completed CETA (N = 144) compared to all controls, we observed a 7-percentage point (95% CI: −0.03, 0.18) increase in retention and viral suppression.

Conclusions

Our estimates suggest overall there was no meaningful difference in retention and viral suppression at 12 months between individuals who received CETA compared to individuals who received the active safety control. Future work should seek to determine if CETA can be effective among those who complete the intervention.

Abstract Image

共同要素治疗方法对南非遭受亲密伴侣暴力的妇女艾滋病毒治疗结果的影响:一项随机试验。
导言:在世界上艾滋病毒感染率最高的南非,亲密伴侣暴力和常见的精神健康状况是坚持艾滋病毒治疗和实现病毒抑制的障碍。共同要素治疗方法(CETA)是一种以认知行为治疗为基础的干预措施,专为非专业保健工作者提供服务,可有效减少心理和行为健康问题,但尚未对改善艾滋病毒治疗结果的有效性进行试验。我们进行了一项随机对照试验,以评估CETA在改善南非IPV妇女艾滋病毒治疗结果方面的有效性。方法:这是一项在接受抗逆转录病毒治疗(ART)的女性艾滋病毒感染者中进行的单盲试验,这些女性在过去12个月内经历过性和/或身体IPV,并且病毒载量未受抑制或在过去一年中存在药物依从性差的风险(例如,拖欠治疗,迟到或错过门诊就诊)。女性按1:1随机分组,接受8-12次CETA咨询或每周安全短信。主要终点是基线后12个月的病毒抑制(≤50拷贝/mL)(需要保留),使用常规收集的医疗记录进行评估。估计线性回归模型来计算风险差异和95%置信区间(CI)。结果:参与者于2021年11月11日至2023年7月19日入组,其中202名女性随机分配到CETA组,197名随机分配到对照组。中位年龄为41.0岁(四分位数差[IQR]: 34.0, 47.0),中位ART治疗时间为8.2年(IQR: 4.3, 12.5)。与对照组相比,接受CETA与滞留和病毒抑制下降1个百分点(95% CI: -0.11, 0.09)相关。当仅限于完成CETA的个体(N = 144)时,与所有对照组相比,我们观察到保留率和病毒抑制率增加了7个百分点(95% CI: -0.03, 0.18)。结论:我们的估计表明,总的来说,接受CETA的个体与接受主动安全控制的个体相比,在12个月的保留率和病毒抑制方面没有显著差异。未来的工作应寻求确定CETA是否对完成干预的患者有效。
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
Journal of the International AIDS Society
Journal of the International AIDS Society IMMUNOLOGY-INFECTIOUS DISEASES
CiteScore
8.60
自引率
10.00%
发文量
186
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of the International AIDS Society (JIAS) is a peer-reviewed and Open Access journal for the generation and dissemination of evidence from a wide range of disciplines: basic and biomedical sciences; behavioural sciences; epidemiology; clinical sciences; health economics and health policy; operations research and implementation sciences; and social sciences and humanities. Submission of HIV research carried out in low- and middle-income countries is strongly encouraged.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书