Raising the issue of quality in implementation science reporting in global health: Implications for health planning and practice.

Implementation outcomes, which focus on the barriers to, and facilitators and processes of healthcare delivery, are critical to translating research evidence to health planning and practice and to improving healthcare delivery. This article summarises key quality issues in reporting of implementation science outcomes within global health and describes the ways in which this presents a challenge for shifting health planning and practice across low-resource health systems. This article also suggests that the wider use of reporting guidelines for implementation outcomes could help address this issue.

Equity M&M - Adaptation of the Morbidity and Mortality Conference to Analyze and Confront Structural Inequity in Internal Medicine.

BACKGROUND: At morbidity and mortality (M&M) conferences, medical teams review cases for medical education and system improvement. Adverse outcomes are often driven by social inequity, but processes to analyze such outcomes are lacking. AIM: Adapt quality improvement and patient safety (QIPS) tools in the M&M format to systematically analyze adverse patient outcomes rooted in social and structural determinants of health (SSDH). SETTING: One-hour conferences conducted in health systems in Seattle, WA, and Dallas, TX. PARTICIPANTS: Equity M&M conferences were held 11 times, each with approximately 45 participants comprised of internal medicine trainees, faculty, and non-medical staff. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION: Conferences included a case narrative and counternarrative highlighting SSDH, an equity-framed root cause analysis, and potential interventions. PROGRAM EVALUATION: Conferences were received well across both institutions. Following conferences, most respondents reported increased identification of opportunities for action towards equity (88.5%) and confidence in discussing equity issues with colleagues (92.3%). DISCUSSION: Equity M&M conferences are a structured tool for deconstructing and confronting structural inequity that leads to adverse patient outcomes. Evaluations demonstrate educational impact on participants. Anecdotal examples suggest institutional impact. Other health systems could adopt this model for similar advocacy and system improvement.

Racial disparities in use of syringe service programs in King County, WA: a comparison of two cross-sectional surveys.

BACKGROUND: Syringe service programs (SSPs) provide tools to people who inject drugs (PWID) to prevent overdose, reduce the risk of HIV and HCV infection, and reduce injection frequency. While effective, previous research suggests that SSPs may not adequately reach some marginalized or particularly vulnerable subpopulations of PWID. METHODS: To identify disparities in SSP use, data from two cross-sectional surveys conducted in King County, Washington were compared: a survey of SSP clients and a community survey of PWID in King County. It was hypothesized that Black PWID, women, and gender minorities would be underrepresented in the SSP survey relative to the general population of PWID. RESULTS: SSP clients identified as White at a significantly higher rate than the community sample of PWID (p = 0.030). Black (p < 0.001), American Indian/Alaska Native (p < 0.001), Latinx/Hispanic (p = 0.009), and Native Hawaiian/ Pacific Islander PWID (p = 0.034) were underrepresented in the SSP client survey. The gender of SSP clients was similar to the distribution seen in the community sample of PWID (p = 0.483). CONCLUSIONS: Black PWID are underrepresented in Seattle-area SSPs, consistent with studies in other large US cities. Both nationally and in Seattle, overdose deaths have been increasing among Black PWID, and harm reduction strategies are vital to reversing this trend. SSPs should explore and test ways to be more accessible to minority populations.

Implementing Task-Shared Child and Adolescent Psychological Interventions in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Scoping Review.

OBJECTIVE: Effective "task shared," or nonspecialist delivered, psychological interventions for children and adolescents have been developed or adapted in low- and middle-income countries with the aim of closing the global treatment gap for youth mental health care. Yet, delivery remains limited, in part due to the lack of knowledge of associated implementation, or process, outcomes. This scoping review aims to describe, examine the quality of, and synthesize findings on implementation outcomes of child and adolescent psychological interventions in low-and middle-income countries. METHODS: PubMed, Web of Science, and PsycInfo were searched for studies on child and adolescent psychological interventions in low- and middle-income countries reporting on implementation outcomes. After abstract and full-text review, data were extracted and summarized on implementation outcomes and quality of implementation outcomes reporting. Implementation barriers and recommendations for addressing barriers were also charted and narratively synthesized. RESULTS: Out of 5,207 manuscripts, 86 met inclusion criteria. Younger children were underrepresented. Studies largely reported feasibility and acceptability and did not state hypotheses or use conceptual models. Barriers primarily related to interventions being too complex, not an acceptable fit with participant cultures, and facilitators lacking time for or experiencing distress delivering interventions. Recommendations focused on increasing intervention fit and flexibility, training and support for facilitators, and linkages with existing systems. CONCLUSIONS: Rigorous, broader implementation outcomes research is needed within child and adolescent psychological intervention research in low-and middle-income countries. Current evidence suggests the importance of the further developing strategies to increase acceptability to participants and better support facilitators.

Peer providers and linkage with buprenorphine care after hospitalization: A retrospective cohort study.

Background: People with opioid use disorder (OUD) are increasingly started on buprenorphine in the hospital, yet many patients do not attend outpatient buprenorphine care after discharge. Peer providers, people in recovery themselves, are a growing part of addiction care. We examine whether patients who received a low-intensity, peer-delivered intervention during hospitalization had a greater rate of linking with outpatient buprenorphine care relative to those not seen by a peer. Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study of adults with OUD who were started on buprenorphine during hospitalization. The primary outcome was receipt of a buprenorphine prescription within 30 days of discharge. Secondary outcomes included attendance at a follow-up visit with a buprenorphine provider within 30 days and hospital readmission within 90 days. Modified Poisson regression analyses tested for differences in the rate ratios (RR) of each binary outcome for patients who were versus were not seen by a peer provider. Peer notes in the electronic health record were reviewed to characterize peer activities. Results: 111 patients met the study inclusion criteria, 31.5% of whom saw a peer provider. 55.0% received a buprenorphine prescription within 30 days of hospital discharge. Patients with versus without peer provider encounters did not significantly differ in the rates of receiving a buprenorphine prescription (RR = 1.06, 95% CI: 0.74-1.51), hospital readmission (RR = 1.45, 95% CI: 0.80-2.64), or attendance at a buprenorphine follow-up visit (RR = 1.03, 95% CI: 0.68-1.57). Peers most often listened to or shared experiences with patients (68.6% of encounters) and helped facilitate medical care (60.0% of encounters). Conclusions: There were no differences in multiple measures of buprenorphine follow-up between patients who received this low-intensity peer intervention and those who did not. There is need to investigate what elements of peer provider programs contribute to patient outcomes and what outcomes should be assessed when evaluating peer programs.

"It's that longitudinal relationship that pays off": A qualitative study of internal medicine residents' perspectives on learning to prescribe buprenorphine.

Background: The opioid use disorder (OUD) epidemic is a national public health crisis. Access to effective treatment with buprenorphine is limited, in part because few physicians are trained to prescribe it. Little is known about how post-graduate trainees learn to prescribe buprenorphine or how to optimally train them to prescribe. We therefore aimed to explore the experiences and attitudes of residents learning to prescribe buprenorphine within two primary care-based opioid treatment models. Methods: We performed semi-structured interviews with second- and third-year internal medicine residents at an urban academic residency program. Participating residents practiced in clinics providing buprenorphine care using either a nurse care manager model or a provider-centric model. Subjects were sampled purposively to ensure that a diversity of perspectives were included. Interviews were conducted until theoretical saturation was reached and were analyzed using principles of thematic analysis. The research team developed a consensus code list. Each transcript was then independently coded by two researchers. The team then summarized each code and generated a set of themes that captured the main ideas emerging from the data. Results: We completed 14 interviews. Participants reported learning to prescribe buprenorphine through didactics, longitudinal outpatient prescribing, mentorship, and inpatient experiences. We characterized their attitudes toward patients with OUD, medication treatment of OUD, their own role in buprenorphine care, and future prescribing. Participants practicing in both clinical models viewed learning to prescribe buprenorphine as a normal part of their training and demonstrated positive attitudes toward buprenorphine prescribing. Conclusions: Longitudinal outpatient experiences with buprenorphine prescribing can prepare residents to prescribe buprenorphine and stimulate interest in prescribing after residency. Both nurse care manager and provider-centric clinical models can provide meaningful experiences for medical residents. Educators should attend to the volume of patients and inductions managed by each trainee, patient-provider continuity, and supporting trainees in the clinical encounter.

Mutual Capacity Building to Reduce the Behavioral Health Treatment Gap Globally.

Use of lay health workers for the treatment of common mental disorders is an expanding, yet still underutilized, opportunity for closing the behavioral health treatment gap globally. In this commentary, we describe how "mutual capacity building," an equal exchange of ideas between low and middle-income countries (LMICs) and high-income countries (HICs) to promote shared learning, could promote the development and scale-up of therapies using lay health workers. We propose ways that task sharing models for behavioral health can inform and be supported by bidirectional learning across HICs and LMICs.

HIV Infection in Attendees of Psychiatric Clinics in Harare, Zimbabwe; Prevalence, Associated Factors and HIV Care Uptake.

Determination of HIV prevalence among people with mental illness is necessary for developing integrated services for HIV and mental illness. This study determined HIV prevalence and uptake of HIV care among outpatients of psychiatric hospitals in Harare, Zimbabwe. HIV status was determined using open testing of 270 randomly selected consenting adult outpatients. HIV prevalence was 14.4% and the risk of acquiring HIV was similar to the general population of adults in Zimbabwe. Females were six times more likely to have HIV infection than males. Although a relatively high proportion of patients had been tested for HIV in the past (77.2%), fewer were recently tested (27.8%). Access to HIV care was high (94%) amongst patients previously diagnosed to be HIV positive. Tertiary mental health services should offer similar HIV care packages as other points of care and there is need for interventions that reduce the risk of HIV in women with mental disorders.

Addressing substance use disorder in primary care: The role, integration, and impact of recovery coaches.

BACKGROUND: Only 10% of people with substance use disorder (SUD) receive treatment, partially due to inadequate access to specialty SUD care and limited management within primary care. "Recovery coaches" (RCs), peers sharing the lived experience of addiction and recovery, are increasingly being integrated into primary care to help reach and treat people experiencing SUD, yet little is known about how their role should be defined or about their clinical integration and impact. METHODS: Semistructured interviews with RCs (n = 5) and their patients (n = 16) were used to explore patient and RC perspectives on the RC role. Maximum variation sampling was employed to select patients who displayed diversity across gender, RC, housing status, and number of contacts with an RC. Patients were sampled until no new concepts emerged from additional interviews, and a semistructured interview guide was used for data collection. To analyze interview transcripts, the constant comparative method was used to develop and assign inductively developed codes. Two coders separately coded all transcripts and reconciled code assignments. RESULTS: Four core RC activities were identified: system navigation, supporting behavior change, harm reduction, and relationship building. Across these activities, benefits of the RC role emerged, including accessibility, shared experiences, motivation of behavior change, and links to social services. Challenges of the RC model were also evident: patient discomfort with asking for help, lack of clarity in RC role, and tension within the care team. CONCLUSIONS: These findings shed light on RCs in primary care. Many patients and coaches perceived that RCs play a valuable role within primary care, providing both tangible system navigation and intangible, social support that promote recovery and might not otherwise be available. Enhanced communication between RCs and health center leadership in defining the RC role may help resolve ambiguity and related tensions between RCs and care team members.

Benchmarks for Reducing Emergency Department Visits and Hospitalizations Through Community Health Workers Integrated Into Primary Care: A Cost-Benefit Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Uncertainty about the financial costs and benefits of community health worker (CHW) programs remains a barrier to their adoption. OBJECTIVES: To determine how much CHWs would need to reduce emergency department (ED) visits and associated hospitalizations among their assigned patients to be cost-neutral from a payer's perspective. RESEARCH DESIGN: Using a microsimulation of patient health care utilization, costs, and revenues, we estimated what portion of ED visits and hospitalizations for different conditions would need to be prevented by a CHW program to fully pay for the program's expenses. The model simulated CHW programs enrolling patients with a history of at least 1 ED visit for a chronic condition in the prior year, utilizing data on utilization and cost from national sources. RESULTS: CHWs assigned to patients with uncontrolled hypertension and congestive heart failure, as compared with other common conditions, achieve cost-neutrality with the lowest number of averted visits to the ED. To achieve cost-neutrality, 4-5 visits to the ED would need to be averted per year by a CHW assigned a panel of 70 patients with uncontrolled hypertension or congestive heart failure-approximately 3%-4% of typical ED visits among such patients, respectively. Most other chronic conditions would require between 7% and 12% of ED visits to be averted to achieve cost-savings. CONCLUSION: Offsetting costs of a CHW program is theoretically feasible for many common conditions. Yet the benchmark for reducing ED visits and associated hospitalizations varies substantially by a patient's primary diagnosis.

Impact of Community Health Workers on Use of Healthcare Services in the United States: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: As the US transitions to value-based healthcare, physicians and payers are incentivized to change healthcare delivery to improve quality of care while controlling costs. By assisting with the management of common chronic conditions, community health workers (CHWs) may improve healthcare quality, but physicians and payers who are making choices about care delivery also need to understand their effects on healthcare spending. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PsycINFO, Embase, and Web of Science from the inception of each database to 22 June 2015. We included US-based studies that evaluated a CHW intervention for patients with at least one chronic health condition and reported cost or healthcare utilization outcomes. We evaluated studies using tools specific to study design. RESULTS: Our search yielded 2,941 studies after removing duplicates. Thirty-four met inclusion and methodological criteria. Sixteen studies (47%) were randomized controlled trials (RCTs). RCTs typically had less positive outcomes than other study designs. Of the 16 RCTs, 12 reported utilization outcomes, of which 5 showed a significant reduction in one or more of ED visits, hospitalizations and/or urgent care visits. Significant reductions reported in ED visits ranged from 23%-51% and in hospitalizations ranged from 21%-50%, and the one significant reduction in urgent care visits was recorded at 60% (p < 0.05 for all). DISCUSSION: Our results suggest that CHW interventions have variable effects, but some may reduce costs and preventable utilization. These findings suggest that it is possible to achieve reductions in care utilization and cost savings by integrating CHWs into chronic care management. However, variations in cost and utilization outcomes suggest that CHWs alone do not make an intervention successful. The paucity of rigorous studies and heterogeneity of study designs limited conclusions about factors associated with reduced utilization.

Mutual capacity building model for adaptation (MCB-MA): a seven-step procedure bidirectional learning and support during intervention adaptation.

Global health reciprocal innovation emphasizes the movement of technologies or interventions between high- and low-income countries to address a shared public health problem, in contrast to unidirectional models of "development aid" or "reverse innovation". Evidence-based interventions are frequently adapted from the setting in which they were developed and applied in a new setting, presenting an opportunity for learning and partnership across high- and low-income contexts. However, few clear procedures exist to guide researchers and implementers on how to incorporate equitable and learning-oriented approaches into intervention adaptation across settings. We integrated theories from pedagogy, implementation science, and public health with examples from experience adapting behavioral health interventions across diverse settings to develop a procedure for a bidirectional, equitable process of intervention adaptation across high- and low-income contexts. The Mutual capacity building model for adaptation (MCB-MA) is made up of seven steps: 1) Exploring: A dialogue about the scope of the proposed adaptation and situational appraisal in the new setting; 2) Developing a shared vision: Agreeing on common goals for the adaptation; 3) Formalizing: Developing agreements around resource and data sharing; 4) Sharing complementary expertise: Group originating the intervention supporting the adapting group to learn about the intervention and develop adaptations, while gleaning new strategies for intervention implementation from the adapting group; 5) Reciprocal training: Originating and adapting groups collaborate to train the individuals who will be implementing the adapted intervention; 6) Mutual feedback: Originating and adapting groups share data and feedback on the outcomes of the adapted intervention and lessons learned; and 7) Consideration of next steps: Discuss future collaborations. This evidence-informed procedure may provide researchers with specific actions to approach the often ambiguous and challenging task of equitable partnership building. These steps can be used alongside existing intervention adaptation models, which guide the adaptation of the intervention itself.

Global Is Local: Leveraging Global Mental-Health Methods to Promote Equity and Address Disparities in the United States.

Structural barriers perpetuate mental health disparities for minoritized US populations; global mental health (GMH) takes an interdisciplinary approach to increasing mental health care access and relevance. Mutual capacity building partnerships between low and middle-income countries and high-income countries are beginning to use GMH strategies to address disparities across contexts. We highlight these partnerships and shared GMH strategies through a case series of said partnerships between Kenya-North Carolina, South Africa-Maryland, and Mozambique-New York. We analyzed case materials and narrative descriptions using document review. Shared strategies across cases included: qualitative formative work and partnership-building; selecting and adapting evidence-based interventions; prioritizing accessible, feasible delivery; task-sharing; tailoring training and supervision; and mixed-method, hybrid designs. Bidirectional learning between partners improved the use of strategies in both settings. Integrating GMH strategies into clinical science-and facilitating learning across settings-can improve efforts to expand care in ways that consider culture, context, and systems in low-resource settings.

Changes in alcohol consumption reported on routine healthcare screenings are associated with changes in depression symptoms.

BACKGROUND: The Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test-Consumption version (AUDIT-C) has been robustly validated as a point-in-time screen for unhealthy alcohol use, but less is known about the significance of changes in AUDIT-C scores from routine screenings over time. Unhealthy alcohol use and depression commonly co-occur, and changes in drinking often co-occur with changes in depression symptoms. We assess the associations between changes in AUDIT-C scores and changes in depression symptoms reported on brief screens completed in routine care. METHODS: The study sample included 198,335 primary care patients who completed two AUDIT-C screens 11 to 24 months apart and the Patient Health Questionnaire-2 (PHQ-2) depression screen on the same day as each AUDIT-C. Both screening measures were completed as part of routine care within a large health system in Washington state. AUDIT-C scores were categorized to reflect five drinking levels at both time points, resulting in 25 subgroups with different change patterns. For each of the 25 subgroups, within-group changes in the prevalence of positive PHQ-2 depression screens were characterized using risk ratios (RRs) and McNemar's tests. RESULTS: Patient subgroups with increases in AUDIT-C risk categories generally experienced increases in the prevalence of positive depression screens (RRs ranging from 0.95 to 2.00). Patient subgroups with decreases in AUDIT-C risk categories generally experienced decreases in the prevalence of positive depression screens (RRs ranging from 0.52 to 1.01). Patient subgroups that did not have changes in AUDIT-C risk categories experienced little or no change in the prevalence of positive depression screens (RRs ranging from 0.98 to 1.15). CONCLUSIONS: As hypothesized, changes in alcohol consumption reported on AUDIT-C screens completed in routine care were associated with changes in depression screening results. Results support the validity and clinical utility of monitoring changes in AUDIT-C scores over time as a meaningful measure of changes in drinking.

Association between clinical measures of unhealthy alcohol use and subsequent year hospital admissions in a primary care population.

BACKGROUND: Screening for unhealthy alcohol use in primary care may help identify patients at risk for negative health outcomes. AIMS: This study examined the associations between 1) screening with the AUDIT-C (alcohol consumption) and 2) an Alcohol Symptom Checklist (symptoms of alcohol use disorder) and subsequent-year hospitalizations. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study was conducted in 29 primary care clinics in Washington State. Patients were screened in routine care (10/1/2016-2/1/2019) with the AUDIT-C (0-12) and administered the Alcohol Symptom Checklist (0-11) if they had AUDIT-C score ≥ 7. All-cause hospitalizations were measured within 1 year of the AUDIT-C and Alcohol Symptom Checklist. AUDIT-C and Alcohol Symptom Checklist scores were categorized based on previously used cut-points. FINDINGS: Of 305,376 patients with AUDIT-Cs, 5.3% of patients were hospitalized in the following year. AUDIT-C scores had a J-shaped relationship with hospitalizations, with risk for all-cause hospitalizations higher for patients with the AUDIT-C scores 9-12 (12.1%; 95% CI: 10.6-13.7%, relative to a comparison group of those with AUDIT-C scores 1-2 (female)/1-3 (male) (3.7%; 95% CI: 3.6-3.8%), adjusted for socio-demographics. Patients with AUDIT-C ≥ 7 and Alcohol Symptom Checklist scores reflecting severe AUD were at increased risk of hospitalization (14.6%, 95% CI: 11.9-17.9%) relative to those with lower scores. CONCLUSIONS: Higher AUDIT-C scores were associated with higher incidence of hospitalizations except among people with low-level drinking. Among patients with AUDIT-C ≥ 7, the Alcohol Symptom Checklist identified patients at increased risk of hospitalization. This study helps demonstrate the potential clinical utility of the AUDIT-C and Alcohol Symptom Checklist.

Applying a mutual capacity building model to inform peer provider programs in South Africa and the United States: A combined qualitative analysis.

BACKGROUND: Globally, there is a treatment gap for substance use treatment and harm reduction services. As peer-delivered interventions expand to address this gap in both high-income countries (HICs) and low and middle-income countries (LMICs), they provide an opportunity to examine mutual capacity building, the bidirectional exchange of ideas between distinct settings to address common challenges. METHODS: The aim of this study was to explore the perspectives of patients in Cape Town and Baltimore about the acceptability and feasibility of a peer-delivered intervention using a combined qualitative analysis across a HIC and LMIC. Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with participants in pilot trials in Cape Town, South Africa and Baltimore, USA (n=55). Across both trials, participants received a peer-delivered behavioral intervention focused on problem solving strategies for medication adherence, behavioral activation, and other cognitive-behavioral skills. The datasets from each location were merged and analyzed jointly using thematic analysis to develop codes and themes. Transcripts were coded to theoretical saturation (n=21 from Baltimore, n=16 from Cape Town). RESULTS: Participants highlighted what they valued about the peer-delivered intervention: 1) behavioral skills learned, 2) relationship with the peer, 3) ability to help others based on what they learned, 4) improved adherence to HIV or substance use medications, and 5) changes in substance use behaviors. In Baltimore, participants were typically more focused on their supportive relationship with the peer, which contrasted with many other relationships in their lives. In Cape Town, many participants highlighted the value of the skills they learned, such as mindfulness and activity scheduling. CONCLUSIONS: Across sites, participants valued that the peer could support them to accomplish meaningful life goals beyond substance use recovery, such as building relationships or health. Differences between settings may highlight the importance of tailoring peer interventions to fill context-specific gaps in available services.

"You rise up and then you start pulling people up with you": Patient experiences with a peer-delivered behavioral activation intervention to support methadone treatment.

BACKGROUND: Although medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) are efficacious treatments for opioid use disorder, retention remains low. Peer recovery specialists (PRSs), individuals with lived substance use and recovery experience, may be particularly well-suited to support patients receiving MOUD. While PRSs are rarely trained in evidence-based behavioral interventions other than motivational interviewing, preliminary evidence suggests that peers can deliver brief behavioral interventions, such as behavioral activation, with efficacy and fidelity. This qualitative study sought to explore patient perspectives on receiving an adapted PRS-delivered behavioral activation intervention (Peer Activate) to support patients receiving methadone treatment. METHODS: The sample (N = 26) included patients recently starting or demonstrating challenges with adherence at a community-based methadone treatment program who received the Peer Activate intervention in a pilot trial. Participants were invited to participate in in-depth, semi-structured interviews at study completion or discontinuation, assessing perceived acceptability and feasibility of Peer Activate, and stigma-related barriers. Interview transcripts were coded using codebook/template thematic analysis. RESULTS: Analysis revealed the importance of two areas to promote intervention acceptability: 1) connection with intervention content and skill building, and 2) valued PRS-specific qualities. Intervention flexibility was found to promote feasibility of the intervention in the context of chaotic and challenging life circumstances. Additionally, participants described stigma towards substance use and methadone treatment as potential barriers to engaging in methadone treatment. CONCLUSION: Results support the acceptability and feasibility to patients of this PRS-delivered behavioral activation intervention in the context of outpatient MOUD treatment among a low-income, majority racially minoritized patient population. Future intervention adaptation and implementation should focus on incorporating content related to relationships and interpersonal skills; balancing behavioral intervention content with system navigation support; maintaining flexibility; and further investigation of the impact of individual PRS attributes, including shared lived experiences, on intervention acceptability and shifts in stigma.

Patient and stakeholder perspectives on impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on HIV and mental health care delivery in South Africa.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic had a global impact on health systems and the delivery of health services, including for chronic conditions such as HIV. In South Africa, impacts on HIV services have widely been quantitatively described. Across different health settings, patients have also qualitatively described numerous negative impacts to their HIV care. However, patient perspectives on COVID-19 impacts to HIV care in South Africa, the largest HIV care system in the world, have been little explored to date. METHODS: We conducted 29 semi-structured individual interviews with people living with HIV (n = 24) and providers (n = 5) in Cape Town, South Africa. RESULTS: While most patient participants reported continued access to HIV treatment during the pandemic, many described perceiving that the quality of their care declined. Increased structural barriers were described as one contributing factor to this change. Additionally, patients described that reduced privacy in clinical interactions was a key factor negatively influencing their experience of receiving care. CONCLUSION: Findings underscore the importance of ensuring patient privacy for HIV services even during the rearrangement of services in emergencies. It is also important to continue developing models to integrate community mental health services within HIV care delivery in South Africa.

"It's all about asking from those who have walked the path": Patient and stakeholder perspectives on how peers may shift substance use stigma in HIV care in South Africa.

BACKGROUND: South Africa has the highest number of people with HIV (PWH) globally and a significant burden of co-occurring substance use disorder (SUD). Health care worker (HCW) stigma towards SUD is a key barrier to HIV care engagement among PWH with SUD. Support from peers-individuals with lived experience of SUD-may be a promising solution for addressing SUD stigma, while also improving engagement in HIV care. We evaluated the perceived acceptability of integrating a peer role into community-based HIV care teams as a strategy to address SUD stigma at multiple levels and improve patient engagement in HIV care. METHODS: Patients and stakeholders (N = 40) were recruited from publicly-funded HIV and SUD organizations in Cape Town, South Africa. We conducted a quantitative assessment of stigma among stakeholders using an adapted Social Distance Scale (SDS) and patient perceptions of working with a peer, as well as semi-structured interviews focused on experiences of SUD stigma, acceptability of a peer model integrated into community-based HIV care, and potential peer roles. RESULTS: On the SDS, 75% of stakeholders had high stigma towards a patient with SUD, yet 90% had low stigma when in recovery for at least 2 years. All patients endorsed feeling comfortable talking to someone in recovery and wanting them on their HIV care team. Three main themes emerged from the qualitative data: (1) patient-reported experiences of enacted SUD and HIV stigmas were common and impacted HIV care engagement; (2) both patients and stakeholders considered a peer model highly acceptable for integration into HIV care to support engagement and address SUD stigma; and (3) patients and stakeholders identified both individual-level and systems-level roles for peers, how peers could work alongside other providers to improve patient care, and key characteristics that peers would need to be successful in these roles. CONCLUSIONS: Findings from this formative work point to the promise of a peer model for reducing SUD stigma among patients and HCWs within community-based HIV care teams in SA.

Peer recovery coaches in general medical settings: Changes in utilization, treatment engagement, and opioid use.

Recovery coaches, trained peers with a history of substance use disorder (SUD) who are formally embedded in the health care team, may be a cost-effective approach to support outpatient management of SUD treatment. Although recovery coach programs are scaling nationwide, limited data exist to support their impact on costs or clinical outcomes. This study aimed to evaluate the integration of peer recovery coaches in general medical settings. Staff hired and trained nine recovery coaches as a part of a health system-wide effort to redesign SUD care. We examined reductions in acute care utilization and increases in outpatient treatment utilization among patients connected to a recovery coach. Additionally, we examined buprenorphine treatment engagement and opioid abstinence among a subset of patients who initiated buprenorphine prior to or within 30 days of their first recovery coach contact. We hypothesized recovery coach contact would strengthen outpatient SUD treatment and be associated with reductions in SUD severity and preventable acute care utilization. We included patients with an initial recovery coach contact between January 2015 and September 2017 in the main analyses (N = 1171). We assessed utilization outcomes via medical records over one year, comparing the six months before and after first recovery coach contact. We used chart review to extract toxicology results and buprenorphine treatment engagement for the subset of patients initiated on buprenorphine (n = 135). In the six months following recovery coach contact, there was a 44% decrease in patients hospitalized and a 9% decrease in patients with an ED visit. There was a 66% increase in outpatient utilization across primary care, community health center visits, mental health, and laboratory visits. Among patients who initiated buprenorphine, current recovery coach contact was associated with significantly increased odds of buprenorphine treatment engagement (OR = 1.89; 95% CI: 1.49-2.39; p < 0.001) and opioid abstinence (OR = 1.32; 95% CI: 1.02-1.70; p < 0.001). Recovery coaches may be an impactful and potentially cost-effective addition to an SUD care team, but future research is needed that uses a matched comparison condition.