Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30953503›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2019

Understanding factors influencing linkage to HIV care in a rural setting, Mbeya, Tanzania: qualitative findings of a mixed methods study.

Erica S Sanga, Ferdinand C Mukumbang, Adiel K Mushi, Wondwossen Lerebo, Christina Zarowsky

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 54 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
54citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

5 authors.

Erica S SangaNIMR-Mwanza Medical Research Centre, P.O Box 1462, Mwanza, Tanzania. ericass80@hotmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1764-545X
Ferdinand C MukumbangSchool of Public Health- University of Western Cape, Cape Town, South Africa.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1441-2172
Adiel K MushiNational Institute for Medical Research (NIMR), London, England.
Wondwossen LereboSchool of Public Health- University of Western Cape, Cape Town, South Africa.
Christina ZarowskySchool of Public Health- University of Western Cape, Cape Town, South Africa.

Funding

African Doctoral Dissertation Research Fellowship (ADDRF) award offered by the Africa Population and Health Research Center (APHRC) 2014-2016-ADF 009,Institute of Tropical Medicine-Antwerp WriFunded a writing retreat at Institute of Tropical Medicine (ITM)- SIPHI scholarship.Mbeya Medical Research Centre Tuition feeUniversity of the Western Cape PhD workshops
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn remote rural Tanzania, the rate of linkage into HIV care was estimated at 28% in 2014. This study explored facilitators and barriers to linkage to HIV care at individual/patient, health care provider, health system, and contextual levels to inform eventual design of interventions to improve linkage to HIV care.

methodsWe conducted a descriptive qualitative study nested in a cohort study of 1012 newly diagnosed HIV-positive individuals in Mbeya region between August 2014 and July 2015. We conducted 8 focus group discussions and 10 in-depth interviews with recently diagnosed HIV-positive individuals and 20 individual interviews with healthcare providers. Transcripts were analyzed inductively using thematic content analysis. The emergent themes were then deductively fitted into the four level ecological model.

resultsWe identified multiple factors influencing linkage to care. HIV status disclosure, support from family/relatives and having symptoms of disease were reported to facilitate linkage at the individual level. Fear of stigma, lack of disclosure, denial and being asymptomatic, belief in witchcraft and spiritual beliefs were barriers identified at individual's level. At providers' level; support and good patient-staff relationship facilitated linkage, while negative attitudes and abusive language were reported barriers to successful linkage. Clear referral procedures and well-organized clinic procedures were system-level facilitators, whereas poorly organized clinic procedures and visit schedules, overcrowding, long waiting times and lack of resources were reported barriers. Distance and transport costs to HIV care centers were important contextual factors influencing linkage to care.

conclusionLinkage to HIV care is an important step towards proper management of HIV. We found that access and linkage to care are influenced positively and negatively at all levels, however, the individual-level and health system-level factors were most prominent in this setting. Interventions must address issues around stigma, denial and inadequate awareness of the value of early linkage to care, and improve the capacity of HIV treatment/care clinics to implement quality care, particularly in light of adopting the 'Test and Treat' model of HIV treatment and care recommended by the World Health Organization.

Indexed as

Ambulatory Care FacilitiesContinuity of Patient CareHealth Services AccessibilityReferral and ConsultationRural PopulationSocial StigmaAdultCohort StudiesDisclosureFemaleFocus GroupsHealth PersonnelHIVHIV InfectionsHumansMaleBarriers to HIV care linkageFacilitators to HIV care linkageHealth systemHIVLinkage to careQualitative researchQuality of careTanzania

Identifiers

PMID30953503
PMCPMC6451278

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.