Skip to content

✪ A pragmatic approach to identifying implementation barriers and facilitators for a novel pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) delivery model at public facilities in urban Uganda

Authors:

Dorothy Thomas, Andrew Mujugira, Katrina Ortblad, Sylvia Namanda, Joseph Kibuuka, Mai Nakitende, Florence Nambi, Lylianne Nakabugo, Caitlin Scoville, Timothy Muwonge, Renee Heffron

University of Washington affiliated authors are displayed in bold.

✪ Open Access

Published: January 2022

Read the full text in the open access journal Implementation Science Communications

Abstract:

Background

Scalable HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) delivery models for resource-limited settings are critical for improving PrEP coverage and interrupting HIV transmission. This research uses technical assistance (TA) reports to evaluate implementation barriers and facilitators for a novel delivery model integrating PrEP and antiretroviral therapy (ART) delivery for HIV sero-different couples in public health facilities in Kampala, Uganda.

Methods

We used data from the Partners PrEP Program (PPP)—a stepped-wedge cluster randomized trial that is launching PrEP delivery through an integrated model of oral PrEP and antiretroviral therapy (ART) delivery for HIV sero-different couples at public health facilities in Kampala and Wakiso, Uganda (NCT03586128). Technical assistance teams, comprised of PPP program staff, conducted monthly TA visits to implementing facilities where they identified and addressed implementation challenges in collaboration with health facility staff. Findings were recorded in TA reports, a standardized form structured using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). We used a conceptual content analysis approach to evaluate TA reports completed from January to December 2019 and identify implementation barriers and facilitators.

Results

Among 39 reports from the 8 implementing facilities (~ 5 per facility), we identified 11 CFIR constructs. Key implementation facilitators included sensitizing and educating facility staff about PrEP (knowledge and beliefs about the innovation); establishing formal and informal feedback and accountability mechanisms (reflecting and evaluating); and empowering facility staff to address implementation challenges (self-efficacy). Key implementation barriers were related to ineffective recruitment and referral of sero-different couples to and from nearby facilities (cosmopolitanism) as well as stockouts of laboratory resources and testing supplies (available resources).

Conclusions

This analysis featured a robust implementation science framework to assess the relationship between early implementation determinants and outcomes of this innovative PrEP delivery model. Further, we have provided important descriptions of early implementation barriers and facilitators that will inform scale-up efforts for PrEP delivery within and beyond Uganda. Future work will refine the analysis of pragmatic program data, qualitatively investigate the identified key themes, and explore strategies for addressing implementation barriers.

**This abstract is posted with permission under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License**

✪ Integrated Delivery of Antiretroviral Treatment and Pre-exposure Prophylaxis to HIV-1–Serodiscordant Couples: A Prospective Implementation Study in Kenya and Uganda

Authors:

Jared M. Baeten, Renee Heffron, Lara Kidoguchi, Nelly R. Mugo, Elly Katabira, Elizabeth A. Bukusi, Stephen Asiimwe, Jessica E. Haberer, Jennifer Morton, Kenneth Ngure, Nulu Bulya, Josephine Odoyo, Edna Tindimwebwa, Craig Hendrix, Mark A. Marzinke, Norma C. Ware, Monique A. Wyatt, Susan Morrison, Harald Haugen, Andrew Mujugira, Deborah Donnell, Connie Celum, & the Partners Demonstration Project Team

University of Washington affiliated authors are displayed in bold.

✪ Open Access

Published: August 2016

Read the full text in the open access journal PLOS Medicine

Abstract:

Background

Antiretroviral-based interventions for HIV-1 prevention, including antiretroviral therapy (ART) to reduce the infectiousness of HIV-1 infected persons and pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) to reduce the susceptibility of HIV-1 uninfected persons, showed high efficacy for HIV-1 protection in randomized clinical trials. We conducted a prospective implementation study to understand the feasibility and effectiveness of these interventions in delivery settings.

Methods and Findings

Between November 5, 2012, and January 5, 2015, we enrolled and followed 1,013 heterosexual HIV-1-serodiscordant couples in Kenya and Uganda in a prospective implementation study. ART and PrEP were offered through a pragmatic strategy, with ART promoted for all couples and PrEP offered until 6 mo after ART initiation by the HIV-1 infected partner, permitting time to achieve virologic suppression. One thousand thirteen couples were enrolled, 78% of partnerships initiated ART, and 97% used PrEP, during a median follow-up of 0.9 years. Objective measures of adherence to both prevention strategies demonstrated high use (≥85%).

Given the low HIV-1 incidence observed in the study, an additional analysis was added to compare observed incidence to incidence estimated under a simulated counterfactual model constructed using data from a prior prospective study of HIV-1-serodiscordant couples. Counterfactual simulations predicted 39.7 HIV-1 infections would be expected in the population at an incidence of 5.2 per 100 person-years (95% CI 3.7–6.9). However, only two incident HIV-1 infections were observed, at an incidence of 0.2 per 100 person-years (95% CI 0.0–0.9, p < 0.0001 versus predicted). The use of a non-concurrent comparison of HIV-1 incidence is a potential limitation of this approach; however, it would not have been ethical to enroll a contemporaneous population not provided access to ART and PrEP.

Conclusions

Integrated delivery of time-limited PrEP until sustained ART use in African HIV-1-serodiscordant couples was feasible, demonstrated high uptake and adherence, and resulted in near elimination of HIV-1 transmission, with an observed HIV incidence of <0.5% per year compared to an expected incidence of >5% per year.

**This abstract is posted with permission under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License**