Skip to content

✪ Healthcare provider perspectives on integrating HIV care into cancer centers in Malawi, South Africa, Uganda, and Zimbabwe

Authors:

Michalina A Montaño, Alfred Jatho, Cecilia Nassolo, Noleb Mugisha, Agatha Bula, Maganizo B Chagomerana, Margaret Borok, Takudzwa J Mtisi, Maureen Joffe, Rachel A. Bender Ignacio, and Ntokozo Ndlovu

University of Washington affiliated authors are displayed in bold.

✪ Open Access

Published: January 2025

Read the full text open access in the journal Translational Oncology

Abstract:

Background

In East and Southern Africa, treatment of people with concomitant cancer and HIV is complicated by siloed service delivery pathways, which exacerbate barriers to care and impact clinical decision-making. Integrating HIV care into cancer treatment centers may improve service delivery and overall patient outcomes.

Methods

We administered a questionnaire to clinicians and support staff at tertiary cancer referral centers in Malawi, Zimbabwe, Uganda, and South Africa to assess level of concern about clinical management of people with HIV (PWH) and cancer, barriers to integrating HIV service delivery into cancer treatment delivery, and beliefs related to HIV, antiretroviral therapy (ART), and integrated care.

Results

Of 195 clinician and support staff participants, 165 (85 %) were direct providers of cancer-associated care. Over 50 % indicated that they held concerns about survival, treatment complications, co-morbidities, and drug-drug interactions in PWH compared to patients without HIV. Over 80 % agreed that knowing cancer patients’ HIV status, ART status, and ART regimen would facilitate better care and should be considered in cancer care decision-making. Overall, respondents were optimistic that HIV-related care could be easily integrated into cancer care provision. The most-frequently endorsed barriers to integrated care were workspace limitations, disruptions to workflow, availability of staff, and cost to the hospital and to patients.

Conclusions

Cancer clinicians and support staff report overall positive attitudes toward integrating HIV and cancer service delivery. Research to elucidate service delivery pathways and contextualize system-based barriers to integrating care are critical next steps to optimize linked HIV and cancer care delivery.

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

✪ Training and Support Practices and Insights in the Sustainability of mHealth Implementations in Sub-Saharan Africa

Authors:

Diana Babirye & Richard Anderson

University of Washington affiliated authors are displayed in bold.

✪ Open Access

Published: January 2025

Read the full text in the open access ACM Journal on Computing and Sustainable Societies

Abstract:

We conducted an interview-based study to understand the training and support practices and insights that influence sustainable implementations of mHealth projects of varying mHealth technologies. The qualitative assessment was inspired by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research adapted with the recommended questions for guiding the implementation of training programs. Participants in the study (N = 16) were both international and in-country researchers managing projects in sub-Saharan Africa. We chose to focus on training and support, as it is often the interface between international and in-country components of these projects. Participants agreed on the central role of training in the implementation of mHealth projects and are following best practices. There was often a division in the responsibility of training between international and in-country researchers reflecting the distinction between project management and local implementation adaptions. One of the main findings is the importance of individualized continuous retraining to make deployments robust with respect to changing conditions with technology and personnel, an aspect that has been managed a bit differently with varying mHealth technologies as presented in this article.

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

✪ Supply chain management and accessibility to point-of-care testing in resource-limited settings: a systematic scoping review

Authors:

Desmond Kuupiel, Vitalis Bawontuo, Paul K. Drain, Nonjabulo Gwala, & Tivani P. Mashamba-Thompson

University of Washington affiliated authors are displayed in bold.

Published: July 2019

Read the full text in the open access journal BMC Health Services Research

Abstract:

Background

World Health Organization (WHO) has created an essential list of in-vitro diagnostics. Supply chain management (SCM) is said to be the vehicle that ensures that developed point-of-care (POC) tests reach their targeted settings for use. We therefore, mapped evidence on SCM of and accessibility to POC testing (availability and use of POC tests) in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs).

Methods

We conducted a systematic scoping review using Arksey and O’Malley’s framework as a guide. We searched PubMed; CINAHL; MEDLINE; WEB of Science; Science Direct; and Google Scholar databases for studies that focused on POC diagnostic tests and SCM. The review included studies that were undertaken in 140 countries defined by the World Bank as LMICs published up to August 2017. Two reviewers independently screened the abstracts and full articles against the eligibility criteria. The study used the mixed methods appraisal tool version 2011 to assess the risk of bias for the included studies. NVivo version 11 was employed to extract themes from all included studies and results presented using a narrative approach.

Results

Of 292 studies identified in this review, only 15 published between 2009 and 2017 included evidence on POC diagnostics and SCM. Of the 15 studies, three were conducted in Zambia, one each in Mozambique, Uganda, Guatemala; South Africa, one in Burkina Faso, Zimbabwe, and one multi-country study (Tanzania, Uganda, China, Peru and Zambia and Brazil). Six studies were not country specific since they were not primary studies. Majority of the studies reported stock-outs of HIV, syphilis, and malaria POC tests. There was a moderate to substantial level of agreement between the reviewers’ responses at full article screening stage (Kappa statistic = 0.80, p <  0.01). Nine studies underwent methodological quality appraisal and all, scored between 90 and 100%.

Conclusions

The results demonstrated limited published research on SCM of and accessibility to POC testing in LMICs. Further studies aimed at investigating SCM of POC tests in resource-limited settings to identify the barriers/challenges and provide a context-specific evidence-based solutions for policy/decision makers, implementers, and POC developers, funders, and development partners would be essential.

PROSPERO registration number

CRD42016043711

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

✪ Implementation science and stigma reduction interventions in low- and middle-income countries: A systematic review

Authors:

Christopher G. Kemp, Brooke A. Jarrett, Churl-Su Kwon, Lanxin Song, Nathalie Jetté, Jaime C. Sapag, Judith Bass, Laura Murray, Deepa Rao & Stefan Baral

University of Washington affiliated authors are displayed in bold.

✪ Open Access

Published: February 2019

Read the full text in the open access journal BMC Medicine

Abstract:

Background

Interventions to alleviate stigma are demonstrating effectiveness across a range of conditions, though few move beyond the pilot phase, especially in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Implementation science offers tools to study complex interventions, understand barriers to implementation, and generate evidence of affordability, scalability, and sustainability. Such evidence could be used to convince policy-makers and donors to invest in implementation. However, the utility of implementation research depends on its rigor and replicability. Our objectives were to systematically review implementation studies of health-related stigma reduction interventions in LMICs and critically assess the reporting of implementation outcomes and intervention descriptions.

Methods

PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and EMBASE were searched for evaluations of stigma reduction interventions in LMICs reporting at least one implementation outcome. Study- and intervention-level characteristics were abstracted. The quality of reporting of implementation outcomes was assessed using a five-item rubric, and the comprehensiveness of intervention description and specification was assessed using the 12-item Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR).

Results

A total of 35 eligible studies published between 2003 and 2017 were identified; of these, 20 (57%) used qualitative methods, 32 (91%) were type 1 hybrid effectiveness-implementation studies, and 29 (83%) were evaluations of once-off or pilot implementations. No studies adopted a formal theoretical framework for implementation research. Acceptability (20, 57%) and feasibility (14, 40%) were the most frequently reported implementation outcomes. The quality of reporting of implementation outcomes was low. The 35 studies evaluated 29 different interventions, of which 18 (62%) were implemented across sub-Saharan Africa, 20 (69%) focused on stigma related to HIV/AIDS, and 28 (97%) used information or education to reduce stigma. Intervention specification and description was uneven.

Conclusion

Implementation science could support the dissemination of stigma reduction interventions in LMICs, though usage to date has been limited. Theoretical frameworks and validated measures have not been used, key implementation outcomes like cost and sustainability have rarely been assessed, and intervention processes have not been presented in detail. Adapted frameworks, new measures, and increased LMIC-based implementation research capacity could promote the rigor of future stigma implementation research, helping the field deliver on the promise of stigma reduction interventions worldwide.

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