Roberta Gagliardini , Andrea Giacomelli , Giorgio Bozzi , Antonella D'Arminio Monforte , Alessandro Tavelli , Valentina Mazzotta , Elena Bruzzesi , Adriana Cervo , Annalisa Saracino , Cristina Mussini , Enrico Girardi , Alessandro Cozzi-Lepri , Andrea Antinori , ICONA Foundation study group
{"title":"COVID-19 大流行对 ICONA 队列中本地和移民艾滋病毒感染者继续接受护理的影响。","authors":"Roberta Gagliardini , Andrea Giacomelli , Giorgio Bozzi , Antonella D'Arminio Monforte , Alessandro Tavelli , Valentina Mazzotta , Elena Bruzzesi , Adriana Cervo , Annalisa Saracino , Cristina Mussini , Enrico Girardi , Alessandro Cozzi-Lepri , Andrea Antinori , ICONA Foundation study group","doi":"10.1016/j.tmaid.2024.102691","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>COVID-19 pandemic challenged the UNAIDS 90-90-90 targets. How the COVID-19 pandemic affected HIV retention in care and whether it has disproportionally affected migrant people with HIV (PWH) remained to be investigated.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>PWH in ICONA Cohort in follow-up in each of the study periods were included: 01/09/2019-29/02/2020 (pandemic period) and 01/03/2018-31/08/2018 (historical period, as a control). Risk of temporary loss to follow-up (LTFU, defined as no data recorded for a person for one year) was analyzed by logistic regression, with migrant status as the main exposure variable. Difference in difference (DID) analysis was applied to evaluate the effect of COVID-19 pandemic in the different risk of LTFU between natives and migrants.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>8864 (17.1% migrants) and 8071 (16.8% migrants) PWH constituted the pandemic and the historical period population, respectively.</p><p>Proportion of PWH defined as LTFU in the pandemic period was 10.5% in native and 19.6% in migrant PWH.</p><p>After controlling for age, sex and geographical location of enrolling site, risk of temporary LTFU was higher for migrants than native PWH [adjusted odds ratio 1.85 (95%CI 1.54–2.22)] in pandemic period. In PWH contributing to both periods, LTFU was 9.0% (95% CI 8.3–9.8) in natives vs 17.0% (95% CI 14.7–19.4) in migrants during the pandemic. Instead, LTFU was 1.2% (95%CI 0.9, 1.5) in natives vs 2.2% (95% CI 1.3–3.1) in migrants during the historical period, with a resulting DID of 7.0% (95% CI 4.4–9.6).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>A greater proportion of LTFU in migrant PWH was observed in both periods, which remained unaltered over time. Interventions to reduce LTFU of migrants are necessary.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":23312,"journal":{"name":"Travel Medicine and Infectious Disease","volume":"58 ","pages":"Article 102691"},"PeriodicalIF":6.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S147789392400005X/pdfft?md5=a8a01699f4e0c31b54be371f1f9c09d1&pid=1-s2.0-S147789392400005X-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on retention in care of native and migrant people with HIV in the ICONA cohort\",\"authors\":\"Roberta Gagliardini , Andrea Giacomelli , Giorgio Bozzi , Antonella D'Arminio Monforte , Alessandro Tavelli , Valentina Mazzotta , Elena Bruzzesi , Adriana Cervo , Annalisa Saracino , Cristina Mussini , Enrico Girardi , Alessandro Cozzi-Lepri , Andrea Antinori , ICONA Foundation study group\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.tmaid.2024.102691\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>COVID-19 pandemic challenged the UNAIDS 90-90-90 targets. How the COVID-19 pandemic affected HIV retention in care and whether it has disproportionally affected migrant people with HIV (PWH) remained to be investigated.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>PWH in ICONA Cohort in follow-up in each of the study periods were included: 01/09/2019-29/02/2020 (pandemic period) and 01/03/2018-31/08/2018 (historical period, as a control). Risk of temporary loss to follow-up (LTFU, defined as no data recorded for a person for one year) was analyzed by logistic regression, with migrant status as the main exposure variable. Difference in difference (DID) analysis was applied to evaluate the effect of COVID-19 pandemic in the different risk of LTFU between natives and migrants.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>8864 (17.1% migrants) and 8071 (16.8% migrants) PWH constituted the pandemic and the historical period population, respectively.</p><p>Proportion of PWH defined as LTFU in the pandemic period was 10.5% in native and 19.6% in migrant PWH.</p><p>After controlling for age, sex and geographical location of enrolling site, risk of temporary LTFU was higher for migrants than native PWH [adjusted odds ratio 1.85 (95%CI 1.54–2.22)] in pandemic period. In PWH contributing to both periods, LTFU was 9.0% (95% CI 8.3–9.8) in natives vs 17.0% (95% CI 14.7–19.4) in migrants during the pandemic. Instead, LTFU was 1.2% (95%CI 0.9, 1.5) in natives vs 2.2% (95% CI 1.3–3.1) in migrants during the historical period, with a resulting DID of 7.0% (95% CI 4.4–9.6).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>A greater proportion of LTFU in migrant PWH was observed in both periods, which remained unaltered over time. Interventions to reduce LTFU of migrants are necessary.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23312,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Travel Medicine and Infectious Disease\",\"volume\":\"58 \",\"pages\":\"Article 102691\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S147789392400005X/pdfft?md5=a8a01699f4e0c31b54be371f1f9c09d1&pid=1-s2.0-S147789392400005X-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Travel Medicine and Infectious Disease\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S147789392400005X\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"INFECTIOUS DISEASES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Travel Medicine and Infectious Disease","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S147789392400005X","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on retention in care of native and migrant people with HIV in the ICONA cohort
Background
COVID-19 pandemic challenged the UNAIDS 90-90-90 targets. How the COVID-19 pandemic affected HIV retention in care and whether it has disproportionally affected migrant people with HIV (PWH) remained to be investigated.
Methods
PWH in ICONA Cohort in follow-up in each of the study periods were included: 01/09/2019-29/02/2020 (pandemic period) and 01/03/2018-31/08/2018 (historical period, as a control). Risk of temporary loss to follow-up (LTFU, defined as no data recorded for a person for one year) was analyzed by logistic regression, with migrant status as the main exposure variable. Difference in difference (DID) analysis was applied to evaluate the effect of COVID-19 pandemic in the different risk of LTFU between natives and migrants.
Results
8864 (17.1% migrants) and 8071 (16.8% migrants) PWH constituted the pandemic and the historical period population, respectively.
Proportion of PWH defined as LTFU in the pandemic period was 10.5% in native and 19.6% in migrant PWH.
After controlling for age, sex and geographical location of enrolling site, risk of temporary LTFU was higher for migrants than native PWH [adjusted odds ratio 1.85 (95%CI 1.54–2.22)] in pandemic period. In PWH contributing to both periods, LTFU was 9.0% (95% CI 8.3–9.8) in natives vs 17.0% (95% CI 14.7–19.4) in migrants during the pandemic. Instead, LTFU was 1.2% (95%CI 0.9, 1.5) in natives vs 2.2% (95% CI 1.3–3.1) in migrants during the historical period, with a resulting DID of 7.0% (95% CI 4.4–9.6).
Conclusions
A greater proportion of LTFU in migrant PWH was observed in both periods, which remained unaltered over time. Interventions to reduce LTFU of migrants are necessary.
期刊介绍:
Travel Medicine and Infectious Disease
Publication Scope:
Publishes original papers, reviews, and consensus papers
Primary theme: infectious disease in the context of travel medicine
Focus Areas:
Epidemiology and surveillance of travel-related illness
Prevention and treatment of travel-associated infections
Malaria prevention and treatment
Travellers' diarrhoea
Infections associated with mass gatherings
Migration-related infections
Vaccines and vaccine-preventable disease
Global policy/regulations for disease prevention and control
Practical clinical issues for travel and tropical medicine practitioners
Coverage:
Addresses areas of controversy and debate in travel medicine
Aims to inform guidelines and policy pertinent to travel medicine and the prevention of infectious disease
Publication Features:
Offers a fast peer-review process
Provides early online publication of accepted manuscripts
Aims to publish cutting-edge papers