Non-communicable diseases (NCDs), including cardiovascular diseases (CVD), hypertension and diabetes together with HIV infection are among the major public health concerns worldwide. Health services for HIV and NCDs require health systems that provide for people's chronic care needs, which present an opportunity to coordinate efforts and create synergies between programmes to benefit people living with HIV and/or AIDS and NCDs. This review included studies that reported service integration for HIV and/or AIDS with coronary heart diseases, chronic CVD, cerebrovascular diseases (stroke), hypertension or diabetes. We searched multiple databases from inception until October 2015. Articles were screened independently by two reviewers and assessed for risk of bias. 11,057 records were identified with 7,616 after duplicate removal. After screening titles and abstracts, 14 papers addressing 17 distinct interventions met the inclusion criteria. We categorized integration models by diseases (HIV with diabetes, HIV with hypertension and diabetes, HIV with CVD and finally HIV with hypertension and CVD and diabetes). Models also looked at integration from micro (patient focused integration) to macro (system level integrations). Most reported integration of hypertension and diabetes with HIV and AIDS services and described multidisciplinary collaboration, shared protocols, and incorporating screening activities into community campaigns. Integration took place exclusively at the meso-level, with no micro-or macro-level integrations described. Most were descriptive studies, with one cohort study reporting evaluative outcomes. Several innovative initiatives were identified and studies showed that CVD and HIV service integration is feasible.Integration should build on existing protocols and use the community as a locus for advocacy and health services, while promoting multidisciplinary teams, including greater involvement of pharmacists. There is a need for robust and well-designed studies at all levels -particularly macrolevel studies, research looking at long-term outcomes of integration, and research in a more diverse range of countries.

BackgroundThe frequency in which HIV and AIDS and mental health problems co-exist, and the complex bi-directional relationship between them, highlights the need for effective care models combining services for HIV and mental health. Here, we present a systematic review that synthesizes the literature on interventions and approaches integrating these services.MethodsThis review was part of a larger systematic review on integration of services for HIV and non-communicable diseases. Eligible studies included those that described or evaluated an intervention or approach aimed at integrating HIV and mental health care. We searched multiple databases from inception until October 2015, independently screened articles identified for inclusion, conducted data extraction, and assessed evaluative papers for risk of bias.ResultsForty-five articles were eligible for this review. We identified three models of integration at the meso and micro levels: single-facility integration, multi-facility integration, and integrated care coordinated by a non-physician case manager. Single-site integration enhances multidisciplinary coordination and reduces access barriers for patients. However, the practicality and cost-effectiveness of providing a full continuum of specialized care on-site for patients with complex needs is arguable. Integration based on a collaborative network of specialized agencies may serve those with multiple co-morbidities but fragmented and poorly coordinated care can pose barriers. Integrated care coordinated by a single case manager can enable continuity of care for patients but requires appropriate training and support for case managers. Involving patients as key actors in facilitating integration within their own treatment plan is a promising approach.ConclusionThis review identified much diversity in integration models combining HIV and mental health services, which are shown to have potential in yielding positive patient and service delivery outcomes when implemented within appropriate contexts. Our review revealed a lack of research in low- and middle- income countries, and was limited to most studies being descriptive. Overall, studies that seek to evaluate and compare integration models in terms of long-term outcomes and cost-effectiveness are needed, particularly at the health system level and in regions with high HIV and AIDS burden.

Introduction: Substance use is an important risk factor for HIV, with both concentrated in certain vulnerable and marginalized populations. Although their management differs, there may be opportunities to integrate services for substance use and HIV. In this paper we systematically review evidence from studies that sought to integrate care for people living with HIV and substance use problems.Methods: Studies were included if they evaluated service integration for substance use and HIV. We searched multiple databases from inception until October 2015. Articles were screened independently by two reviewers and assessed for risk of bias.Results and discussion: 11,057 records were identified, with 7616 after removal of duplicates. After screening titles and abstracts, 51 met the inclusion criteria. Integration models were categorized by location (HIV, substance use and other facilities), level of integration from mirco (integrated care delivered to individuals) to macro (system level integrations) and degree of integration from least (screening and counselling only) to most (care for HIV, substance use and/or other illnesses at the same facility). Most reported descriptive or cohort studies; in four randomized control trials integrated activities improved patient outcomes. There is potential for integrating services at all facility types, including mobile health services. While services offering screening only can achieve synergies, there are benefits from delivering integrated treatment for HIV and substance use, including ease of referral to other mental health and social services.Conclusions: Our review used a wide range of databases and conference archives to increase representation of papers from low- and middle-income countries. Limitations include the overrepresentation of studies from the United States, and the descriptive nature of the majority of papers. The evidence reviewed shows that greater integration offers important benefits in both patient and service outcomes but further research and outcome reporting is needed to better understand innovative and holistic care models at the complex intersection of substance use and HIV services.

BackgroundCervical cancer is a major public health problem. Even though readily preventable, it is the fourth leading cause of death in women globally. Women living with HIV are at increased risk of invasive cervical cancer, highlighting the need for access to screening and treatment for this population. Integration of services has been proposed as an effective way of improving access to cervical cancer screening especially in areas of high HIV prevalence as well as lower resourced settings. This paper presents the results of a systematic review of programs integrating cervical cancer and HIV services globally, including feasibility, acceptability, clinical outcomes and facilitators for service delivery.MethodsThis is part of a larger systematic review on integration of services for HIV and non-communicable diseases. To be considered for inclusion studies had to report on programs to integrate cervical cancer and HIV services at the level of service delivery. We searched multiple databases including Global Health, Medline and Embase from inception until December 2015. Articles were screened independently by two reviewers for inclusion and data were extracted and assessed for risk of bias.Main results11,057 records were identified initially. 7,616 articles were screened by title and abstract for inclusion. A total of 21 papers reporting interventions integrating cervical cancer care and HIV services met the criteria for inclusion. All but one study described integration of cervical cancer screening services into existing HIV services. Most programs also offered treatment of minor lesions, a ‘screen-and-treat’ approach, with some also offering treatment of larger lesions within the same visit. Three distinct models of integration were identified. One model described integration within the same clinic through training of existing staff. Another model described integration through co-location of services, with the third model describing programs of integration through complex coordination across the care pathway. The studies suggested that integration of cervical cancer services with HIV services using all models was feasible and acceptable to patients. However, several barriers were reported, including high loss to follow up for further treatment, limited human-resources, and logistical and chain management support. Using visual screening methods can facilitate screening and treatment of minor to larger lesions in a single ‘screen-and-treat’ visit. Complex integration in a single-visit was shown to reduce loss to follow up. The use of existing health infrastructure and funding together with comprehensive staff training and supervision, community engagement and digital technology were some of the many other facilitators for integration reported across models.ConclusionsThis review shows that integration of cervical cancer screening and treatment with HIV services using different models of service delivery is feasible as well as acceptable to women living with HIV. However, the descriptive nature of most papers and la...

No abstract

Introduction: Substance use is an important risk factor for HIV, with both concentrated in certain vulnerable and marginalized populations. Although their management differs, there may be opportunities to integrate services for substance use and HIV. In this paper we systematically review evidence from studies that sought to integrate care for people living with HIV and substance use problems. Methods: Studies were included if they evaluated service integration for substance use and HIV. We searched multiple databases from inception until October 2015. Articles were screened independently by two reviewers and assessed for risk of bias.Results and discussion: 11,057 records were identified, with 7616 after removal of duplicates. After screening titles and abstracts, 51 met the inclusion criteria. Integration models were categorized by location (HIV, substance use and other facilities), level of integration from mirco (integrated care delivered to individuals) to macro (system level integrations) and degree of integration from least (screening and counselling only) to most (care for HIV, substance use and/or other illnesses at the same facility). Most reported descriptive or cohort studies; in four randomized control trials integrated activities improved patient outcomes. There is potential for integrating services at all facility types, including mobile health services. While services offering screening only can achieve synergies, there are benefits from delivering integrated treatment for HIV and substance use, including ease of referral to other mental health and social services. Conclusions: Our review used a wide range of databases and conference archives to increase representation of papers from low-and middle-income countries. Limitations include the overrepresentation of studies from the United States, and the descriptive nature of the majority of papers. The evidence reviewed shows that greater integration offers important benefits in both patient and service outcomes but further research and outcome reporting is needed to better understand innovative and holistic care models at the complex intersection of substance use and HIV services.

Background: The frequency in which HIV and AIDS and mental health problems co-exist, and the complex bi-directional relationship between them, highlights the need for effective care models combining services for HIV and mental health. Here, we present a systematic review that synthesizes the literature on interventions and approaches integrating these services. Methods: This review was part of a larger systematic review on integration of services for HIV and non-communicable diseases. Eligible studies included those that described or evaluated an intervention or approach aimed at integrating HIV and mental health care. We searched multiple databases from inception until October 2015, independently screened articles identified for inclusion, conducted data extraction, and assessed evaluative papers for risk of bias. Results: Forty-five articles were eligible for this review. We identified three models of integration at the meso and micro levels: single-facility integration, multi-facility integration, and integrated care coordinated by a non-physician case manager. Single-site integration enhances multidisciplinary coordination and reduces access barriers for patients. However, the practicality and costeffectiveness of providing a full continuum of specialized care on-site for patients with complex needs is arguable. Integration based on a collaborative network of specialized agencies may serve those with multiple co-morbidities but fragmented and poorly coordinated care can pose barriers. Integrated care coordinated by a single case manager can enable continuity of care for patients but requires appropriate training and support for case managers. Involving patients as key actors in facilitating integration within their own treatment plan is a promising approach. Conclusion: This review identified much diversity in integration models combining HIV and mental health services, which are shown to have potential in yielding positive patient and service delivery outcomes when implemented within appropriate contexts. Our review revealed a lack of research in lowand middle-income countries, and was limited to most studies being descriptive. Overall, studies that seek to evaluate and compare integration models in terms of long-term outcomes and cost-effectiveness are needed, particularly at the health system level and in regions with high HIV and AIDS burden.

No abstract