ArticleGlobal health, science and practice2024
Applying a Three-Tier Approach to Address Gaps in Oral Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis Uptake and Continuity in Uganda: A Mixed Methods Approach.
Article in Global health, science and practice, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWe describe a 3-tier approach involving a gap analysis, root cause analysis, and pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) collaborative to understand the gap and identify and address the main barriers to oral PrEP uptake and continuity in Uganda.
methodsWe used a mixed methods design with retrospective, cross-sectional, and prospective components. The gap analysis involved descriptive analysis of PrEP uptake and continuity. The RCA identified the main barriers to initiation and continuity on PrEP among 1,334 clients who declined to start PrEP and 1,266 who missed their appointment but were at risk. The PrEP collaborative tested changes mapped onto specific barriers to optimize the PrEP clinical service delivery. A trend analysis of routinely collected data of the PrEP cascade determined significant shifts and trends in PrEP uptake and continuity.
resultsOnly 60% of the high-risk population eligible for PrEP were enrolled, while fewer than 30% of the cumulative number of PrEP users were refilled each quarter. Uncertainty and fear of side effects, perceptions about the harmfulness of the medication, perceived inability to adhere to PrEP, and stigma were the main reasons why clients rejected PrEP. Lack of access to the facility, side effects, pill burden, stigma, perceived low-risk exposure to HIV, and preference of staying at work as opposed to picking up refills affected continuity on PrEP. The collaborative registered statistically significant shifts in PrEP enrollment from 64% to 89% and continuity from 51% to 78% between July 21 and November 22 following the collaborative intervention.
conclusionsWe recommend using a 3-tier approach for other similar implementation contexts to strengthen PrEP programming, given the marked statistical shift in PrEP uptake and continuity. This begins with understanding the gap and barriers to use among clients, followed by mapping interventions to specific barriers through a quality improvement collaborative.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.