Feasibility and acceptability of a psychosocial and adherence electronic patient reported outcomes (PROs) system at an HIV care center in southern India

Sinha, Nishita; Yang, Andrew; Pradeep, Amrose; Bhuvaneswari, R.; Kumarasamy, Nagalingeswaran; O’Cleirigh, Conall; Mayer, Kenneth R.; Chan, Betty

doi:10.1080/09540121.2019.1668532

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…8 Screening assessments using patient-reported outcomes assessments (PROs) in routine HIV care can improve patient-provider communication and focus provider attention on symptoms or behaviors that may not otherwise be addressed, such as mental health issues and substance use. [9][10][11][12][13][14] Information obtained through PROs may also aid providers in identifying barriers to ART adherence among their patients. 15 For example, previous studies have demonstrated that substance use, depression, and dissatisfaction with ART are associated with suboptimal ART adherence among PWH who completed PROs at routine HIV clinic visits.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Risk Factors for Suboptimal Adherence Identified by Patient-Reported Outcomes Assessments in Routine HIV Care at 2 North American Clinics

Short¹,

Wang²,

Suri³

et al. 2022

PPA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Use of patient-reported outcomes assessments (PROs) can improve patient-provider communication and focus provider attention on current health issues. This analysis examines the association between suboptimal antiretroviral therapy (ART) adherence and factors obtained through PROs among people with HIV (PWH) at 2 North American outpatient clinics. Patients and Methods: Immediately before a clinic visit, PWH completed self-administered PROs. Unadjusted and adjusted odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated from logistic regression models to identify sociodemographic and health-related factors (satisfaction with ART, difficulty meeting housing costs, depression, intimate partner violence, risk of malnutrition, smoking status, alcohol use, and substance use) associated with suboptimal adherence (defined as self-reporting <95% or <80% adherence). Multiple imputation was performed to account for missing data in the multivariate analyses. Results: Of 1632 PWH, 1239 (76%) responded to the adherence assessment; of these, 268 (22%) and 106 (9%) reported <95% and <80% adherence, respectively. Of 1580 PWH who responded, 354 (22%) were dissatisfied with their HIV medication. Of responding PWH, 19% reported moderate-to-severe depression, 23% indicated they were at risk of malnutrition, 34% were current smokers, and 62% reported substance use in the past 3 months. Dissatisfaction with ART was significantly associated with <95% and <80% adherence in the unadjusted analysis (unadjusted OR [95% CI], 3.38 [2.51-4.56] and 4.26 [2.82-6.42], respectively) and adjusted analysis (adjusted OR [95% CI], 2. 76 [1.91-4.00] and 3.28 [1.95-5.52], respectively); significance remained after multiple imputation. In adjusted analyses, no risk of malnutrition was significantly associated with reduced odds of <95% adherence after multiple imputation (adjusted OR [95% CI], 0.714 [0.511-0.997]); no other factors were associated with <95% or <80% adherence. Conclusion: These results suggest that implementation of PROs evaluating treatment satisfaction may provide value to adherence management in routine HIV care.

show abstract