RESUMO
Background: This study evaluated the effectiveness and responsiveness of differentiated Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV)/Acquired Immuno-Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) service delivery models (DSDMs) implemented to enhance antiretroviral therapy (ART) access and outcomes for patients while addressing Tuberculosis (TB)-HIV integration, focusing on four of the five DSDMs currently implemented in Uganda. Methodology: A descriptive cross-sectional survey was conducted in eight districts of central Uganda using Lot Quality Assurance Sampling approach from 7th to 23rd March 2023. We randomly sampled 2668 patients who have been on ART for at least 1 year in a Facility-Based Individual Management (FBIM) model or in a non-FBIM DSDM for at least one year. Data were collected through patient interviews and review of records in ART and DSDM registers as well as ART cards. We analyzed the data in proportions, comparing the selected ART outcome and responsiveness indicators between Community Client Led ART Distribution (CCLAD), Community Drugs Distribution Point (CDDP) and Fast-Track Drug Refill (FTDR) DSDMs with the standard care (FBIM) model. The ART outcome variables include patients retained in the 1st line of the ART regimen, patients in World Health Organization clinical stage 1 during the last facility visit, patients who had no CD4 request during the past 12 months, viral load suppression, ART adherence, and patients who reported that they did not experience HIV/AIDS-related symptoms in the past 6 months. The variables on TB care include screening for TB using the intensified case finding form and patients tested positive for TB. Responsiveness variables include the perceived; travel time for ART refill, travel distance for ART refill, convenience and flexibility during ART refill, cost of travel for ART refill, fear of being seen at ART refill point, waiting time before service, adequacy of service time, crowding and risk of infections, social support, ability to address ART treatment challenges, HIV status disclosure and barriers to access. Non-overlap in 95% confidence interval in indicator proportion between non-FBIM DSDM and FBIM means a statistically significant difference in proportion, or otherwise non-significant. Results: Higher proportions of ART patients in the CCLAD and CDDP DSDMs adhered to ART, had suppressed viral load, and a lower TB prevalence than those in FBIM model. Additionally, more CCLAD and CDDP clients reported shorter travel time and distance to access ART than their counterparts in the FBIM model. Compared to FBIM model, higher proportions of those in CCLAD and CDDP also reported flexibility in ART refill scheduling, reduced transport costs, fewer privacy concerns, less HIV/AIDS-related stigma, shorter waiting times, more efficient services, decreased congestion at ART pickup sites, enhanced peer support, improved problem-solving assistance, and increased HIV status disclosure. The FTDR model outperformed FBIM in proportions with fewer requests for CD4 testing, viral load suppression, as well as proportions of clients who reported; shorter travel time, lower transportation cost, decreased privacy concerns, shorter waiting time, and efficient service provision. Compared to both CDDP and FTDR, the FBIM had a higher proportion of clients remain on the first-line ART regimen. Conclusion: Community-based DSDMs show responsiveness to clients' needs without compromising the effectiveness of ART care for patients. Although FTDR also demonstrates high effectiveness and responsiveness for clients on ART, there is potential for further improvement. Planners and implementers of ART programs should consider both demand- and supply-side innovations to sustain the continuation of DSDMs.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: HIV/AIDS continues to be a significant contributor to illness and death, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa. In this study, we conducted a qualitative assessment to understand Client and Healthcare Provider Perspectives on Differential Service Delivery Models in Uganda. The purpose was to establish strengths and weaknesses within the services delivery models, inform policy and decision-making, and to facilitate context specific solutions. METHODS: Between February and April 2023, a qualitative cross-sectional study was utilised to gather insights from a targeted selection of individuals, including People Living with HIV (PLHIV), healthcare workers, HIV focal persons, community retail pharmacists, and various stakeholders. The data collection process included eleven in-depth interviews, nine key informant interviews, and eight focus group discussions carried out across eight districts in Central Uganda. The collected data was analyzed through inductive thematic analysis with the aid of Excel. RESULTS: The various Differentiated Service Delivery Models (DSDMs), notably Community-Client-Led Drug Distribution (CCLAD), Community Drug Distribution Point (CDDP), Community Retail Pharmacy Drug Distribution Point (CRPDDP), and the facility-based Facility Based Individual Model (FBIM), were reported to have several positive impacts. These included improved treatment adherence, efficient management of antiretroviral (ARV) supplies, reduced exposure to infectious diseases, enhanced healthcare worker hospitality, minimized travel time for ART refills, stigma reduction, and decreased waiting times. Concern was raised about the lack of improvement in HIV status disclosure, opportunistic infection treatment, adherence to seasonal appointments, and sustainability due to the overreliance of the DSDMs on donor funding, suggesting potential discontinuation without funding. Doubts about health workers' commitment surfaced. Notably, the CCLAD model displayed self-sustainability, with clients financially supporting group members to collect medicines. CONCLUSION: Community-based DSDMs, such as CCLAD and CDDP, improve ART refill convenience, social support, and client experiences. These models reduce travel and waiting times, lowering infection risks. Addressing challenges and enhancing facility-based models is vital. In order to maintain funding after donor funding ends, sustainability measures like cross-subsidization can be used. If well implemented, the DSDMs have the potential to produce better or comparable ART outcomes compared to the FBIM model.