57
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Effect of Peer Health Workers on AIDS Care in Rakai, Uganda: A Cluster-Randomized Trial

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Human resource limitations are a challenge to the delivery of antiretroviral therapy (ART) in low-resource settings. We conducted a cluster randomized trial to assess the effect of community-based peer health workers (PHW) on AIDS care of adults in Rakai, Uganda.

          Methodology/Principal Findings

          15 AIDS clinics were randomized 2∶1 to receive the PHW intervention (n = 10) or control (n = 5). PHW tasks included clinic and home-based provision of counseling, clinical, adherence to ART, and social support. Primary outcomes were adherence and cumulative risk of virologic failure (>400 copies/mL). Secondary outcomes were virologic failure at each 24 week time point up to 192 weeks of ART. Analysis was by intention to treat. From May 2006 to July 2008, 1336 patients were followed. 444 (33%) of these patients were already on ART at the start of the study. No significant differences were found in lack of adherence (<95% pill count adherence risk ratio [RR] 0.55, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.23–1.35; <100% adherence RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.94–1.30), cumulative risk of virologic failure (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.61–1.08) or in shorter-term virologic outcomes (24 week virologic failure RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.65–1.32; 48 week, RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.47–1.48; 72 week, RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.44–1.49). However, virologic failure rates ≥96 weeks into ART were significantly decreased in the intervention arm compared to the control arm (96 week failure RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.31–0.81; 120 week, RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.22–1.60; 144 week, RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.16–0.95; 168 week, RR 0.30, 95% CI 0.097–0.92; 192 week, RR 0.067, 95% CI 0.0065–0.71).

          Conclusions/Significance

          A PHW intervention was associated with decreased virologic failure rates occurring 96 weeks and longer into ART, but did not affect cumulative risk of virologic failure, adherence measures, or shorter-term virologic outcomes. PHWs may be an effective intervention to sustain long-term ART in low-resource settings.

          Trial Registration

          ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00675389

          Related collections

          Most cited references14

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Operational research in low-income countries: what, why, and how?

          Operational research is increasingly being discussed at institutional meetings, donor forums, and scientific conferences, but limited published information exists on its role from a disease-control and programme perspective. We suggest a definition of operational research, clarify its relevance to infectious-disease control programmes, and describe some of the enabling factors and challenges for its integration into programme settings. Particularly in areas where the disease burden is high and resources and time are limited, investment in operational research and promotion of a culture of inquiry are needed so that health care can become more efficient. Thus, research capacity needs to be developed, specific resources allocated, and different stakeholders (academic institutions, national programme managers, and non-governmental organisations) brought together in promoting operational research.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Lay health workers in primary and community health care.

            Lay health workers (LHWs) are widely used to provide care for a broad range of health issues. However, little is known about the effectiveness of LHW interventions. To assess the effects of LHW interventions in primary and community health care on health care behaviours, patients' health and wellbeing, and patients' satisfaction with care. We searched the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care and Consumers and Communication specialised registers (to August 2001); the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (to August 2001); MEDLINE (1966- August 2001); EMBASE (1966-August 2001); Science Citations (to August 2001); CINAHL (1966-June 2001); Healthstar (1975-2000); AMED (1966-August 2001); the Leeds Health Education Effectiveness Database and the reference lists of articles. Randomised controlled trials of any intervention delivered by LHWs (paid or voluntary) in primary or community health care and intended to promote health, manage illness or provide support to patients. A 'lay health worker' was defined as any health worker carrying out functions related to health care delivery; trained in some way in the context of the intervention; and having no formal professional or paraprofessional certificated or degreed tertiary education. There were no restrictions on the types of consumers. Two reviewers independently extracted data onto a standard form and assessed study quality. Studies that compared broadly similar types of interventions were grouped together. Where feasible, the results of included studies were combined and an estimate of effect obtained. Forty three studies met the inclusion criteria, involving more than 210,110 consumers. These showed considerable diversity in the targeted health issue and the aims, content and outcomes of interventions. Most were conducted in high income countries (n=35), but nearly half of these focused on low income and minority populations (n=15). Study diversity limited meta-analysis to outcomes for five subgroups (n=15 studies) (LHW interventions to promote the uptake of breast cancer screening, immunisation and breastfeeding promotion [before two weeks and between two weeks and six months post partum] and to improve diagnosis and treatment for selected infectious diseases). Promising benefits in comparison with usual care were shown for LHW interventions to promote immunisation uptake in children and adults (RR=1.30 [95% CI 1.14, 1.48] p=0.0001) and LHW interventions to improve outcomes for selected infectious diseases (RR=0.74 [95% CI 0.58, 0.93) p=0.01). LHWs also appear promising for breastfeeding promotion. They appear to have a small effect in promoting breast cancer screening uptake when compared with usual care. For the remaining subgroups (n=29 studies), the outcomes were too diverse to allow statistical pooling. We can therefore draw no general conclusions on the effectiveness of these subgroups of interventions. LHWs show promising benefits in promoting immunisation uptake and improving outcomes for acute respiratory infections and malaria, when compared to usual care. For other health issues, evidence is insufficient to justify recommendations for policy and practice. There is also insufficient evidence to assess which LHW training or intervention strategies are likely to be most effective. Further research is needed in these areas.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Implementation Research Is Needed to Achieve International Health Goals

              Sanders and Haines discuss the "knowledge-implementation gap" and identify key obstacles to correcting the gap.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: Editor
                Journal
                PLoS One
                plos
                plosone
                PLoS ONE
                Public Library of Science (San Francisco, USA )
                1932-6203
                2010
                2 June 2010
                : 5
                : 6
                : e10923
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Division of Infectious Diseases, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, United States of America
                [2 ]Rakai Health Sciences Program, Kalisizo, Uganda
                [3 ]Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, United States of America
                [4 ]Laboratory of Immunoregulation, Division of Intramural Research, National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, United States of America
                [5 ]Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, United States of America
                Tulane University, United States of America
                Author notes

                Conceived and designed the experiments: LWC JK GN AHP DS TCQ RHG RB SJR. Performed the experiments: LWC JK GN RHG SJR. Analyzed the data: LWC VS RHG. Wrote the paper: LWC JK GN VS AHP DS TCQ RHG RB SJR.

                Article
                10-PONE-RA-15291R2
                10.1371/journal.pone.0010923
                2880005
                20532194
                0ed92b05-0fa7-45aa-863d-71513053efa3
                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Public Domain declaration which stipulates that, once placed in the public domain, this work may be freely reproduced, distributed, transmitted, modified, built upon, or otherwise used by anyone for any lawful purpose.
                History
                : 30 December 2009
                : 12 May 2010
                Page count
                Pages: 7
                Categories
                Research Article
                Infectious Diseases/HIV Infection and AIDS
                Public Health and Epidemiology/Global Health
                Public Health and Epidemiology/Infectious Diseases

                Uncategorized
                Uncategorized

                Comments

                Comment on this article