Situational analysis of varying models of adherence support and loss to follow up rates; findings from 27 treatment facilities in eight resource limited countries

• Published in: Tropical medicine & international health 2010-06, Vol.15 (s1), p.76-81
• Main Authors: Etienne, M, Burrows, L, Osotimehin, B, Macharia, T, Hossain, B, Redfield, R.R, Amoroso, A
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Acquired immune deficiency syndrome; adherence support; Africa; AIDS; Antiretroviral drugs; Antiretroviral Therapy, Highly Active - statistics & numerical data; Community Health Services - organization & administration; community health workers; Comparative studies; Developing Countries; Disease management; Health care delivery; Health facilities; HIV Infections - drug therapy; HIV/AIDS; Humans; loss to follow up; Lost to Follow-Up; Medically Underserved Area; Medication Adherence - statistics & numerical data; Models, Organizational; Patients; resource limited settings; Retention; Retrospective Studies; West Indies
• ISSN: 1360-2276; 1365-3156
• DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-3156.2010.02513.x

Large-scale provision of ART in the absence of viral load monitoring, resistance testing, and limited second-line treatment options places adherence support as a vital therapeutic intervention. We aimed to compare patient loss to follow up rates with the degree of adherence support through a retrospective review of patients enrolled in the AIDSRelief program between August 2004 and June 2005. Loss to follow up data were analysed and programs were categorised into one of four tiered levels of adherence support models: Tier I, II, III, and IV which increase from lowest to highest support. Bivariate and t-test analyses were used to test for significant differences between the models. 13,391 patients at 27 treatment facilities from six African and two Caribbean countries began antiretroviral therapy within the first year of the AIDSRelief program. The mean loss to follow up within the first year was 7.5%. Eight facilities were Tier I, three (Tier II), nine (Tier III), and seven (Tier IV). Facilities in Tier I had a loss to follow up rate of 14%, Tier II (10%), Tier III (5%), and Tier IV (1%). The proportion of loss to follow up for Tier I and Tier III were significantly different from each other (P < 0.02), as were Tier I and Tier IV (P < 0.006). There were differences between Tier II and Tier IV (P < 0.009) as well as Tier III and Tier IV (P < 0.017). These data strongly support the use of proactive adherence support programs, beyond routine patient counselling and defaulter tracking to support the'public health approach'to ART.