Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28381264›Full record

ArticleImplementation science : IS2017

HIV policy implementation in two health and demographic surveillance sites in Uganda: findings from a national policy review, health facility surveys and key informant interviews.

Ellen McRobie, Alison Wringe, Jessica Nakiyingi-Miiro, Francis Kiweewa, Tom Lutalo, Gertrude Nakigozi, Jim Todd, Jeffrey William Eaton, Basia Zaba, Kathryn Church

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Implementation science : IS, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Ellen McRobieImperial College London, Norfolk Place, London, W2 1PG, UK. e.mcrobie@imperial.ac.uk.
Alison WringeLondon School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Keppel Street, London, UK.
Jessica Nakiyingi-MiiroMRC/UVRI Uganda Research Institute on AIDS, Entebbe, Uganda.
Francis KiweewaMakerere University Walter Reed Project, Kampala, Uganda.
Tom LutaloRakai Health Sciences Program, Entebbe, Uganda.
Gertrude NakigoziRakai Health Sciences Program, Entebbe, Uganda.
Jim ToddLondon School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Keppel Street, London, UK.
Jeffrey William EatonImperial College London, Norfolk Place, London, W2 1PG, UK.
Basia ZabaLondon School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Keppel Street, London, UK.
Kathryn ChurchLondon School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Keppel Street, London, UK.

Funding

Medical Research Council
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSuccessful HIV testing, care and treatment policy implementation is essential for realising the reductions in morbidity and mortality those policies are designed to target. While adoption of new HIV policies is rapid, less is known about the facility-level implementation of new policies and the factors influencing this.

methodsWe assessed implementation of national policies about HIV testing, treatment and retention at health facilities serving two health and demographic surveillance sites (HDSS) (10 in Kyamulibwa, 14 in Rakai). Ugandan Ministry of Health HIV policy documents were reviewed in 2013, and pre-determined indicators were extracted relating to the content and nature of guidance on HIV service provision. Facility-level policy implementation was assessed via a structured questionnaire administered to in-charge staff from each health facility. Implementation of policies was classified as wide (≥75% facilities), partial (26-74% facilities) or minimal (≤25% facilities). Semi-structured interviews were conducted with key informants (policy-makers, implementers, researchers) to identify factors influencing implementation; data were analysed using the Framework Method of thematic analysis.

resultsMost policies were widely implemented in both HDSS (free testing, free antiretroviral treatment (ART), WHO first-line regimen as standard, Option B+). Both had notable implementation gaps for policies relating to retention on treatment (availability of nutritional supplements, support groups or isoniazid preventive therapy). Rakai implemented more policies relating to provision of antiretroviral treatment than Kyamulibwa and performed better on quality of care indicators, such as frequency of stock-outs. Factors facilitating implementation were donor investment and support, strong scientific evidence, low policy complexity, phased implementation and effective planning. Limited human resources, infrastructure and health management information systems were perceived as major barriers to effective implementation.

conclusionsMost HIV policies were widely implemented in the two settings; however, gaps in implementation coverage prevail and the value of ensuring complete coverage of existing policies should be considered against the adoption of new policies in regard to resource needs and health benefits.

Indexed as

Health PolicyAdultAnti-HIV AgentsAttitude of Health PersonnelAttitude to HealthDelivery of Health CareDiffusion of InnovationFemaleHealth Plan ImplementationHealth Services AccessibilityHIV InfectionsHumansMaleMiddle AgedPrevalenceProfessional PracticeAnti-HIV AgentsHealth servicesHIVHIV policiesUganda

Identifiers

PMID28381264
PMCPMC5382427

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.