RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Failure to retain people living with HIV (PLHIV) in care remains a significant barrier to achieving epidemic control in Haiti, with as many as 30% lost from care within one year of starting treatment. Community-led monitoring (CLM) is an emerging approach of improving healthcare and accountability to service users, through a cycle of monitoring and advocacy. In 2020, a CLM program was launched in Haiti to identify barriers to retention and advocating for better health services. METHODS: Data from the community-led monitoring program in Haiti were analyzed, from a sample of 65 healthcare facilities in the Nord, Artibonite, and Ouest departments collected from April 2021 to February 2022. Qualitative data from six community-based focus groups and 45 semi-structured individual interviews were analyzed. RESULTS: Confidentiality and stigmatization emerged as barriers to care, particularly due to the separation of PLHIV from other patients in view of community members. To avoid identification, patients described traveling long distances, with the reimbursement of transportation costs described as being insufficient or unavailable. Costs of non-HIV clinical services were a frequent concern and respondents described a need for clinics to provide food during all patient visits. Stock-outs were a regular challenge; by contrast, treatment literacy did not emerge as a major barrier to retention. CONCLUSIONS: These findings represent the first instance, to our knowledge, of original data from a community-led monitoring program being published in any country. These findings suggest that improving treatment retention for PLHIV is dependent on improving the acceptability and affordability of healthcare services. Ensuring confidentiality is critical, particularly where stigma is high. Retention could be improved by systematically strengthening patient confidentiality protections throughout the healthcare system, providing patients with sufficient travel compensation and other incentives, and delivering wraparound services provided for free. Addressing these challenges will require ongoing advocacy for community-developed recommendations and solutions.
Assuntos
Infecções por HIV , Humanos , Infecções por HIV/tratamento farmacológico , Infecções por HIV/epidemiologia , Haiti/epidemiologia , Atenção à Saúde , Grupos Focais , Estigma Social , Pesquisa QualitativaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: The previously-named Mexico City Policy (MCP) - which prohibited non U.S.-based non-governmental organizations (NGOs) from receiving U.S. family planning (FP) funding if they advocated, provided, counseled, or referred clients for abortions, even with non-U.S. funds - was reinstated and expanded in 2017. For the first time, the expanded MCP (EMCP) applies to HIV funding through the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) in addition to FP funding. Previous, and more limited, iterations of the policy forced clinic closures and decreased contraceptive access, prompting the need to examine where and how the EMCP may impact FP/HIV service integration. METHODS: The likelihood of FP/HIV service de-integration under the EMCP was quantified using a composite risk index for 31 PEPFAR-funded countries. The index combines six standardized indicators from publically available sources organized into three sub-indexes: 1) The importance of PEPFAR for in-country service delivery of HIV and FP services; 2) The susceptibility of implementing partners to the EMCP; and 3) The integration of FP/HIV funds and programming through PEPFAR and USAID. RESULTS: Countries with the highest overall risk scores included Zambia (3.3) Cambodia (3.2), Uganda (3.1), South Africa (2.9), Haiti (2.8), Lesotho (2.8), Swaziland (2.1), and Burundi (1.5). Zambia's risk score is driven by sub-index 1, having a high proportion of country HIV expenditures provided by PEPFAR (86.3%). Cambodia and Uganda's scores are driven sub-index 3, with both countries reporting 100% of PEPFAR supported HIV delivery sites were providing integrated FP services in 2017. South Africa's risk score is driven by sub-index 2, where roughly 60% of PEPFAR funding is to non U.S.-based NGOs. Of the countries with the highest risk scores, Swaziland, Lesotho, and South Africa, are also in the top quartile of PEPFAR countries for HIV prevalence and unintended pregnancies among young women. CONCLUSION: This analysis highlights where and why the EMCP may have the greatest impact on FP/HIV service integration. The possible disruption of service integration in countries with generalized HIV epidemics highlights significant risks. Researchers, national governments, and non-U.S. funders can consider these risk factors to help target their responses to the EMCP and mitigate potential harms of the policy.