The majority of hepatitis C virus (HCV) and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) coinfection occurs among persons who inject drugs. Rapid improvements in responses to HCV therapy have been observed, but liver-related morbidity rates remain high, given notoriously low uptake of HCV treatment. Advances in HCV therapy will have a limited impact on the burden of HCV-related disease at the population-level unless barriers to HCV education, screening, evaluation, and treatment are addressed and treatment uptake increases. This review will outline barriers to HCV care in HCV/HIV coinfection, with a particular emphasis on persons who inject drugs, proposing strategies to enhance HCV treatment uptake and outcomes.

Occasional cannabis use has been associated with increased antiretroviral therapy (ART) adherence and relief of HIV symptoms, while heavy use has been associated with low ART adherence and negative psychological symptoms. The purpose of the present study was to investigate differences between non-cannabis use (NC), nondependent cannabis use (C), and dependent use (CD) in terms of ART adherence and HIV symptoms/ART side effects. A cross-sectional sample of 180 HIV+ individuals (78.3 % male) completed measures of substance use and psychopathology, medication adherence, and HIV symptoms/ART side effects. Adherence was also measured via pill count, viral load, and CD4 count. Results indicated that the CD group reported lower adherence and greater HIV symptoms/ART side effects than the other two groups, with no differences observed between NC and C groups. There is a clinical need to address dependent cannabis use among those prescribed ART. Further examination is needed to ascertain the functions of cannabis use among individuals with HIV.

Informed and shared decision making are critical aspects of patient-centered care, which has contributed to an emphasis on decision support interventions to promote good medical decision making. However, researchers and healthcare providers have not reached a consensus on what defines a good decision, nor how to evaluate it. This position paper, informed by conference sessions featuring diverse stakeholders held at the 2015 Society of Behavioral Medicine and Society for Medical Decision Making annual meetings, describes key concepts that influence the decision making process itself and that may change what it means to make a good decision: interpersonal factors, structural constraints, affective influences, and values clarification methods. This paper also proposes specific research questions within each of these priority areas, with the goal of moving medical decision making research to a more comprehensive definition of a good medical decision, and enhancing the ability to measure and improve the decision making process.