RESUMO
Equitable global health partnerships are essential to promote innovative research and strengthen research capacity to address critical public health challenges, but how to optimally evaluate such collaborations is unclear. This was a sequential, multi-method study that utilized an electronic survey informed by the literature followed by semi-structured interviews to comprehensively evaluate the experience of participating in a global research-capacity building collaboration between Nepal and U.S. clinicians and investigators. De-identified quantitative survey were analyzed to calculate descriptive and summary statistics, along with crosstabs of each variable by group. Groups were defined based on country-of-origin and Chi Square statistics calculated to assess for statistically significant differences (p<0.05) between groups. Interviews were analyzed using a descriptive qualitative approach to develop an overall thematic map. 22 survey responses (52.4% response rate) were analyzed; 13 (59.1%) from Nepal, 9 (40.9%) from the U.S. Eight participants (4 Nepal; 4 U.S.) were interviewed. Over the course of the project, all participants reported gaining experience and confidence with research. The majority of participants "strongly agreed" there was a shared understanding of goals, priorities and strategies (Nepal, 58.3%, n = 7; U.S., 88.9%, n = 8;) and that power was shared equally (Nepal, 58.3%, n = 7; U.S., 55.6%, n = 5). The over-arching theme that emerged from the interviews was the importance of 'establishing community' which participants discussed within the broader context of COVID-19. Overall, team members reported strong bi-directional benefit and a greater emphasis on perceived benefits versus challenges. Our survey tool and interview guide, designed to holistically evaluate the impact of a global partnership across various levels of the Social Ecological Model, with particular attention to power dynamics and equity, can be adapted and used by others engaged in similar research capacity collaborations.
RESUMO
Introduction: We characterized the challenges and innovations of states' Ryan White HIV/AIDS Program (RWHAP) Part B programs, including AIDS Drug Assistance Programs (ADAPs), during the COVID-19 pandemic. In the United States, these are important safety net programs for HIV healthcare, providing essential medical and support services, and medications, to people with HIV with low incomes who are uninsured/underinsured. Methods: Data were collected via the 2021-2022 NASTAD National RWHAP Part B and ADAP Monitoring Project Report, a cross-sectional survey of state, district, and territorial programs through a mixed method study design. For quantitative data, we used descriptive statistics. Qualitative responses were coded and analyzed using content analysis. Results: Forty-seven RWHAP Part B and ADAPs responded (92% response rate). The majority of respondents reported that maintaining client eligibility (78%) and working remotely (70%) were the most challenging aspects of the pandemic, particularly in regards to implementing new telehealth and e-certification platforms. In response to COVID-19, programs introduced enrollment "grace periods" (19%), bolstered client outreach (11%), allowed more than a 30 day supply of medications (79%), and supported medication home delivery for clients (80%). Discussion: Despite the challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic, RWHAP Part B and ADAPs implemented several operational innovations in order to continue providing essential medicines and services. Other public health programs may adopt similar innovations, including digital innovations, for greater public health benefit. Future studies should assess the retention of policy innovations over time, their impact on the individual client level satisfaction or health outcomes, and what factors may improve the acceptability of telehealth and e-certification platforms.
