Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34454444›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2021

Strategies to reengage patients lost to follow up in HIV care in high income countries, a scoping review.

Jorge Palacio-Vieira, Juliana Maria Reyes-Urueña, Arkaitz Imaz, Andreu Bruguera, Luis Force, Amat Orti Llaveria, Josep M Llibre, Ingrid Vilaró, Francesc Homar Borràs, Vicenç Falcó and 6 more

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  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

16 authors.

Jorge Palacio-VieiraCentre for Epidemiological Studies on Sexually Transmitted Infections and HIV/AIDS of Catalonia (CEEISCAT), Badalona, Spain. jpalacio@ceeiscat.cat.ORCID 0000-0002-2937-5979
Juliana Maria Reyes-UrueñaCentre for Epidemiological Studies on Sexually Transmitted Infections and HIV/AIDS of Catalonia (CEEISCAT), Badalona, Spain.
Arkaitz ImazHIV and STI Unit, Department of Infectious Diseases, Bellvitge University Hospital-IDIBELL, L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, Spain.
Andreu BrugueraCentre for Epidemiological Studies on Sexually Transmitted Infections and HIV/AIDS of Catalonia (CEEISCAT), Badalona, Spain.
Luis ForceInternal Medicine, Hospital de Mataró-Consorci Sanitari del Maresme, Mataró, Spain.
Amat Orti LlaveriaInternal Medicine, Hospital Verge de la Cinta de Tortosa, Tortosa, Spain.
Josep M LlibreInfectious Diseases and "Fight AIDS" Foundation, University Hospital Germans Trias i Pujol, Badalona, Spain.
Ingrid VilaróHospital General de Vic, Vic, Spain.
Francesc Homar BorràsHospital Son Llàtzer, Palma de Mallorca, Spain.
Vicenç FalcóVall d'Hebron Hospital Universitari, Vall d'Hebron Institut de Recerca (VHIR), Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
Melchor RieraHospital Son Espases, Palma de Mallorca, Spain.
Pere DomingoHospital de Sant Pau, Barcelona, Spain.
Elisa de LazzariHIV/AIDS Unit. Hospital Clinic, Barcelona, Spain.
Josep M MiróHIV/AIDS Unit. Hospital Clinic, Barcelona, Spain.
Jordi CasabonaCentre for Epidemiological Studies on Sexually Transmitted Infections and HIV/AIDS of Catalonia (CEEISCAT), Badalona, Spain.
PICIS study group

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDespite remarkable achievements in antiretroviral therapy (ART), losses to follow-up (LTFU) might prevent the long-term success of HIV treatment and might delay the achievement of the 90-90-90 objectives. This scoping review is aimed at the description and analysis of the strategies used in high-income countries to reengage LTFU in HIV care, their implementation and impact.

methodsA scoping review was done following Arksey & O'Malley's methodological framework and recommendations from Joanna Briggs Institute. Peer reviewed articles were searched for in Pubmed, Scopus and Web of Science; and grey literature was searched for in Google and other sources of information. Documents were charted according to the information presented on LTFU, the reengagement procedures used in HIV units in high-income countries, published during the last 15 years. In addition, bibliographies of chosen articles were reviewed for additional articles.

resultsTwenty-eight documents were finally included, over 80% of them published in the United States later than 2015. Database searches, phone calls and/or mail contacts were the most common strategies used to locate and track LTFU, while motivational interviews and strengths-based techniques were used most often during reengagement visits. Outcomes like tracing activities efficacy, rates of reengagement and viral load reduction were reported as outcome measures.

conclusionsThis review shows a recent and growing trend in developing and implementing patient reengagement strategies in HIV care. However, most of these strategies have been implemented in the United States and little information is available for other high-income countries. The procedures used to trace and contact LTFU are similar across reviewed studies, but their impact and sustainability are widely different depending on the country studied.

Indexed as

HIV InfectionsLost to Follow-UpDeveloped CountriesHumansIncomeCohort studiesHIVLinkageLost to follow-upReengagement

Identifiers

PMID34454444
PMCPMC8403456

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.