IntroductionThe rapid increase in the number of people living with HIV (PLHIV) on antiretroviral therapy (ART) in Akwa Ibom and Cross River states in Nigeria led to overcrowding at clinics. Patients were devolved to receive ART refills through five differentiated service delivery (DSD) models: fast‐track (FT), adolescent refill clubs (ARCs), community pharmacy ART refill programs (CPARPs), community ART refill clubs (CARCs) and community ART refill groups (CARGs) designed to meet the needs of different groups of PLHIV. In the context of COVID‐19‐related travel restrictions, out‐of‐facility models offered critical mechanisms for continuity of treatment. We compared retention and viral suppression among those devolved to DSD with those who continued standard care at facilities.MethodsA retrospective cohort study was conducted among patients devolved to DSD from January 2018 to December 2020. Bivariate analyses were conducted to assess differences in retention and viral suppression by socio‐demographic characteristics. Kaplan–Meier assessed retention at 3, 6, 9 and 12 months. Differences in proportions were compared using the chi‐square test; a p‐value of <0.05 was considered significant.ResultsA total of 40,800 PLHIV from 84 facilities received ART through the five models: CARC (53%), FT (19.1%), ARC (12.1%), CPARP (10.4%) and CARG (5.4%). Retention rates at 6 months exceeded 96% for all models compared to 94% among those continuing standard care. Among those using DSD, retention rate at 12 months was higher among adults than children (97.8% vs. 96.7%, p = 0.04). No significant sex differences in retention rates were found among those enrolled in DSD. Viral suppression rates among PLHIV served through DSD were significantly higher among adults than children (95.4% vs. 89.2%; p <0.01). Among adults, 95.4% enrolled in DSD were virally suppressed compared to 91.8% of those in standard care (p <0.01). For children, 89.2% enrolled in DSD were virally suppressed compared to 83.2% in standard care (p <0.01).ConclusionsPLHIV receiving ART through DSD models had retention but higher viral suppression rates compared to those receiving standard care. Expanding DSD during COVID‐19 has helped ensure uninterrupted access to ART in Nigeria. Further scale‐up is warranted to decongest facilities and improve clinical outcomes.

IntroductionThe expenditures on treatment of HIV/AIDS to households were examined to quantify the magnitude of the economic burden of HIV/AIDS to different population groups in Nigeria. The information will also provide a basis for increased action towards a reduction of the economic burden on many households when accessing antiretroviral therapy (ART).MethodsA household survey was administered in three states, Adamawa, Akwa Ibom and Anambra, from the South-East, North-East and South-South zones of Nigeria, respectively. A pretested interviewer-administered questionnaire was used to collect data from a minimum sample of 1200 people living with HIV/AIDS (PLHIV). Data were collected on the medical and non-medical expenditures that patients incurred to treat HIV/AIDS for their last treatment episode within three months of the interview date. The expenditures were for outpatient visits (OPV) and inpatient stays (IPS). The incidence of catastrophic health expenditure (CHE) on ART treatment services was computed for OPV and IPS. Data were disaggregated by socio-economic status (SES) and geographic location of the households.ResultsThe average OPV expenditures incurred by patients per OPV for HIV/AIDS treatment was US$6.1 with variations across SES and urban-rural residence. More than 95% of the surveyed households spent money on transportation to a treatment facility and over 70% spent money on food for OPV. For medical expenditures, the urbanites paid more than rural dwellers. Many patients incurred CHE during outpatient and inpatient visits. Compared to urban dwellers, rural dwellers incurred more CHE for outpatient (p=0.02) and inpatient visits (p=0.002).ConclusionsTreatment expenditures were quite high, inequitable and catastrophic in some instances, hence further jeopardizing the welfare of the households and the PLHIV. Strategically locating fully functional treatment centres to make them more accessible to PLHIV will largely reduce expenditures for travel and the need for food during visits. Additionally, financial risk-protection mechanisms such as treatment vouchers, reimbursement and health insurance that will significantly reduce the expenditures borne by PLHIV and their households in seeking ART should be implemented.

BackgroundThe surge of donor funds to fight HIV&AIDS epidemic inadvertently resulted in the setup of laboratories as parallel structures to rapidly respond to the identified need. However these parallel structures are a threat to the existing fragile laboratory systems. Laboratory service integration is critical to remedy this situation. This paper describes an approach to quantitatively measure and track integration of HIV-related laboratory services into the mainstream laboratory services and highlight some key intervention steps taken, to enhance service integration.MethodA quantitative before-and-after study conducted in 122 Family Health International (FHI360) supported health facilities across Nigeria. A minimum service package was identified including management structure; trainings; equipment utilization and maintenance; information, commodity and quality management for laboratory integration. A check list was used to assess facilities at baseline and 3 months follow-up. Level of integration was assessed on an ordinal scale (0 = no integration, 1 = partial integration, 2 = full integration) for each service package. A composite score grading expressed as a percentage of total obtainable score of 14 was defined and used to classify facilities (≤80% FULL, 25% to 79% PARTIAL and <25% NO integration). Weaknesses were noted and addressed.ResultsWe analyzed 9 (7.4%) primary, 104 (85.2%) secondary and 9 (7.4%) tertiary level facilities. There were statistically significant differences in integration levels between baseline and 3 months follow-up period (p<0.01). Baseline median total integration score was 4 (IQR 3 to 5) compared to 7 (IQR 4 to 9) at 3 months follow-up (p = 0.000). Partial and fully integrated laboratory systems were 64 (52.5%) and 0 (0.0%) at baseline, compared to 100 (82.0%) and 3 (2.4%) respectively at 3 months follow-up (p = 0.000).DiscussionThis project showcases our novel approach to measure the status of each laboratory on the integration continuum.

Background This study assessed viral load (VL) testing and viral suppression following enhanced adherence counselling (EAC) among people living with HIV (PLHIV) with suspected treatment failure and identified factors associated with persistent viremia. Methods We conducted a retrospective review of electronic medical records of PLHIV aged 15 years or older who had received ART for at least six months as by December 2020; had a high viral load (HVL) (≥1,000 copies/mL); across 22 comprehensive HIV treatment facilities in Akwa Ibom State, Nigeria. Patients with HVL were expected to receive three EAC sessions delivered in person or virtually and a repeat VL testing upon completion of EAC and after documented good adherence. At six months post-EAC enrolment, we reviewed data to determine client uptake of one or more EAC sessions, completion of three EAC sessions, a repeat viral load (VL) test conducted post-EAC, and persistent viremia with a VL of ≥1,000 copies/mL. Selected socio-demographic and clinical variables were analysed to identify factors associated with persistent viremia using SPSS version 26. Results Of the 3,257 unsuppressed PLHIV, EAC uptake was 94.8%(n = 3,088), EAC completion was 81.5% (2,517/3,088), post-EAC VL testing uptake was 75.9% (2,344/3,088), and viral resuppression was 73.8% (2,280/3,088). In multivariable analysis, those on ART for duration less than 12 months (p=&lt;0.001) and those who completed EAC within three months (p = 0.045) were less likely to have persistent viremia. Conclusion An HVL resuppression rate of 74% was achieved, but EAC completion was low. Identification of the challenges faced by PLHIV with a higher risk of persistent viremia is recommended to optimize the potential benefit of EAC.

Introduction Multimonth dispensing (MMD) enables less frequent clinic visits and improved outcomes for people living with HIV, but few children and adolescents living with HIV (CALHIV) are on MMD. At the end of the October–December 2019 quarter, only 23% of CALHIV receiving antiretroviral therapy (ART) through SIDHAS project sites in Akwa Ibom and Cross River states, Nigeria, were receiving MMD. In March 2020, during COVID-19, the government expanded MMD eligibility to include children and recommended rapid implementation to minimize clinic visits. SIDHAS provided technical assistance to 36 “high-volume” facilities—≥5 CALHIV on treatment—in Akwa Ibom and Cross River to increase MMD and viral load suppression (VLS) among CALHIV, toward PEPFAR’s 80% benchmark for people currently on ART. We present change in MMD, viral load (VL) testing coverage, VLS, optimized regimen coverage, and community-based ART group enrollment among CALHIV from the October–December 2019 quarter (baseline) to January–March 2021 (endline) based on retrospective analysis of routinely collected program data. Materials and methods We compared MMD coverage (primary objective), and optimized regimen coverage, community-based ART group enrollment, VL testing coverage, and VLS (secondary objectives), among CALHIV 18 years and younger pre-/post-intervention (baseline/endline) at the 36 facilities. We excluded children younger than two years, who are not recommended for or routinely offered MMD. The extracted data included age, sex, ART regimen, months of ART dispensed at last refill, most recent VL test results, and community ART group enrollment. Data on MMD—three or more months of ARVs dispensed at one time—were disaggregated into three to five months (3–5-MMD) vs. six or more months (6-MMD). VLS was defined as ≤1,000 copies. We documented MMD coverage by site, optimized regimen, and VL testing and suppression. Using descriptive statistics, we summarized the characteristics of CALHIV on MMD and non-MMD, number of CALHIV on optimized regimens, and proportion enrolled in differentiated service delivery models and community-based ART refill groups. For the intervention, SIDHAS technical assistance was data driven: weekly data analysis/review, site-prioritization scoring, provider mentoring, line listing eligible CALHIV, pediatric regimen calculator, child-optimized regimen transitioning, and community ART models. Results The proportion of CALHIV ages 2–18 receiving MMD increased from 23% (620/2,647; baseline) to 88% (3,992/4,541; endline), while the proportion of sites reporting suboptimal MMD coverage among CALHIV (<80%) decreased (100% to 28%). In March 2021, 49% of CALHIV were receiving 3–5-MMD and 39% 6-MMD. In October–December 2019, 17%–28% of CALHIV were receiving MMD; by January–March 2021, 99% of those 15–18 years, 94% 10–14 years, 79% 5–9 years, and 71% 2–4 years were on MMD. VL testing coverage remained high (90%), while VLS increased (64% to 92%). The proportion on pediatric-optimized regimens increased (58% to 79%). Conclusions MMD was feasible among CALHIV without compromising VLS. Expanded eligibility criteria, line listing eligible children, monitoring pediatric antiretroviral stock, and data use contributed to positive results. Future efforts should address low 6-MMD uptake related to stock limitations and synchronize antiretroviral refill pickup with VL sample collection.