Objective To assess whether customised mobile phone reminders would improve adherence to therapy and thus decrease virological failure among HIV infected patients starting antiretroviral treatment (ART). Design Randomised controlled trial among HIV infected patients initiating antiretroviral treatment.Setting Three diverse healthcare delivery settings in south India: two ambulatory clinics within the Indian national programme and one private HIV healthcare clinic.Participants 631 HIV infected, ART naïve, adult patients eligible to initiate first line ART were randomly assigned to mobile phone intervention (n=315) or standard care (n=316) and followed for 96 weeks.. InterventionThe intervention consisted of customised, interactive, automated voice reminders, and a pictorial message that were sent weekly to the patients' mobile phones for the duration of the study. Main outcome measuresThe primary outcome was time to virological failure (viral load >400 copies/mL on two consecutive measurements). Secondary outcomes included ART adherence measured by pill count, death rate, and attrition rate. Suboptimal adherence was defined as mean adherence <95%. ResultsUsing an intention-to-treat approach we found no observed difference in time to virological failure between the allocation groups: failures in the intervention and standard care arms were 49/315 (15.6%) and 49/316 (15.5%) respectively (unadjusted hazard ratio 0.98, 95% confidence interval 0.67 to 1.47, P=0.95). The rate of virological failure in the intervention and standard care groups were 10.52 and 10.73 per 100 person years respectively. Comparison of suboptimal adherence was similar between both groups (unadjusted incidence rate ratio 1.24, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.65, P=0.14). Incidence proportion of patients with suboptimal adherence was 81/300 (27.0%) in the intervention arm and 65/299 (21.7%) in the standard care arm. The results of analyses adjusted for potential confounders were similar, indicating no significant difference between the allocation groups. Other secondary outcomes such as death and attrition rates, and subgroup analysis also showed comparable results across allocation groups. ConclusionsIn this multicentre randomised controlled trial among ART naïve patients initiating first line ART within the Indian national programme, we found no significant effect of the mobile phone intervention on either time to virological failure or ART adherence at the end of two years of therapy.Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN79261738. IntroductionThe current explosion in the use of mobile phone technology in healthcare coupled with decreasing costs of wireless communications worldwide has led to a panoply of promising mobile phone based interventions among patients with chronic conditions, including HIV infection.1 Systematic reviews acknowledge that mobile phone interventions can help improve specific health conditions, but they also underline the need for high quality clinical trials measuring outcomes in real world With an estimated 2.5...

IntroductionResearch in India has extensively examined the factors associated with non-adherence to antiretroviral therapy (ART) with limited focus on examining the relationship between adherence to ART regimen and survival status of HIV infected patients. This study examines the effect of optimal adherence to ART on survival status of HIV infected patients attending ART centers in Jharkhand, India.Materials and MethodsData from a cohort of 239 HIV infected individuals who were initiated ART in 2007 were compiled from medical records retrospectively for 36 months. Socio-demographic characteristics, CD4 T cell count, presence of opportunistic infections at the time of ART initiation and ART regimen intake and survival status was collected periodically. Optimal adherence was assessed using pill count methods; patients who took <95% of the specified regimens were identified as non-adherent. Cox-proportional hazard model was used to determine the relative hazards of mortality.ResultsMore than three-fourths of the patients were male, on an average 34 year old and median CD4 T cell count was 118 cells/cmm at the time of ART registration. About 57% of the patients registered for ART were found to be adherent to ART. A total of 104 patients died in 358.5 patient-years of observation resulting in a mortality rate of 29 per 100 patient-years (95% confidence interval (CI): 23.9–35.2) and median survival time of 6.5 months (CI: 2.7–10.9). The mortality rate was higher among patients who were non-adherent to ART (64.5, CI: 50.5–82.4) than who were adherent (15.4, CI: 11.3–21.0). The risk of mortality was fourfold higher among individuals who were non-adherent to ART than who were adherent (Adjusted hazard ratio: 3.9, CI: 2.6–6.0).ConclusionAdherence to ART is associated with a higher chance of survival of HIV infected patients, ascertaining the need for interventions to improve the ART adherence and early initiation of ART.

BackgroundIn resource limited settings non-availability of CD4 count facility at the site could adversely affect the ART roll out programme. Point of care CD4 enumerating equipments can make the CD4 count available at the site of care and improve the patients’ management considerably. This study is aimed at determining the utility of a Point of Care PIMA CD4 analyzer (Alere, Germany) in the field settings in India.MethodThe blood samples were collected from 1790 participants at 21 ART centers from different parts of the country and tested using PIMA and the reference methods (FACSCalibur, FACSCount and CyFlow SL3). The paired finger prick and venous blood samples from 175 participants were tested by the PIMA CD4 Analyzer and then by FACSCalibur.ResultThe CD4 counts obtained by PIMA CD4 analyzer showed excellent correlation with the counts obtained by the reference methods; for venous blood the Pearson’s r was 0.921, p < 0.001 and the relative bias was 0.2% (range: -42 to 42%) and for finger prick samples, the Pearson’s r was 0.856 and the relative bias was −9.1% (range: -46% to 27%). For CD4 ranges; <250, 251–350, 351–500 and >500 cells/mm3, the differences in the median CD4 counts obtained by the reference method and the PIMA analyzer were not significant (P > 0.05) and the relative bias were low (−7 to 5.1%). The Intermachine comparison showed variation within the acceptable limit of%CV of 10%.ConclusionIn the field settings, the POC PIMA CD4 analyzer gave CD4 counts comparable to the reference methods for all CD4 ranges. The POC equipment could identify the patients eligible for ART in 91% cases. Adequate training is necessary for finger prick sample collection for optimum results. Decentralization of CD4 testing by making the CD4 counts available at primary health centers, especially in remote areas with minimum or no infrastructure would reduce the missed visits and improve adherence of the patients.