RESUMO
Background: Few countries have implemented the necessary policy changes to reduce the number of steps in the cascade of care to achieve hepatitis C virus (HCV) elimination, including Canada. The aim of this study was to describe and compare legislation, scope of practice, and policy as it relates to the provision of HCV care in each province. Methods: We reviewed grey literature and regulatory and legislative documents which affect various aspects of the HCV cascade of care. Findings were verified by content experts. Results: HCV RNA reflex testing ensures those that are antibody positive get an HCV RNA test; however only 80% of provinces have reflex test. Point-of-care antibody testing can be offered in most community non-health care settings, yet many types of health care providers are unable to do this independently. Following a positive test, it may not be feasible to complete venipuncture; however only a single province processes HCV RNA dried blood spot cards. In many provinces, training and verification are required for novice prescribers, and in some provinces prescribing continues to be restricted to specialists. Only a single province has task-shifted treatment to a non-physician non-nurse practitioner model, where pharmacists can prescribe treatment. Finally, 80% of provinces require authorization forms, and 30% require proof of investigations for treatment. Conclusions: No single province is optimizing the use of diagnostic tools and task shifting and decreasing paperwork to expedite treatment initiation. Collaboration between provinces is needed to streamline practice, update policy, and promote equity in HCV diagnosis, care, and treatment.
RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: The on-going substance use crisis has led to unprecedented rates of hepatitis C virus (HCV) in Canada, with increasing positivity among women who use drugs (WWUD). Despite efforts to reduce barriers to HCV testing and treatment, follow-up remains a major issue. METHODS: In this quality improvement project (QIP), we partnered with a short-stay trauma-informed residential drug treatment facility specifically for WWUD, to provide an engaging peer-led HCV education session, followed by low-barrier nurse and peer-led testing and treatment. We sought to evaluate these interventions, as well as determine what factors could improve engagement after women leave. RESULTS: The session was attended by 217 participants, 130 completed the survey and 153 opted into testing. Survey results indicated that participants were highly motivated to access general care as well as HCV testing and treatment. The most frequently reported barriers to testing and treatment were a previous negative test and being asymptomatic, respectively. Follow-up facilitators included a non-judgmental provider (88%), monetary incentives (67%), follow-up phone calls (77%), e-mails (66%) and text messages (58%). Of those who were RNA positive, 5 of 13 initiated treatment on-site. By using the results of the QIP in real-time, 6 of 13 were started after leaving the centre (one pending and one lost to follow-up). DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of co-localised peer-led testing and treatment for HCV, along with persistent follow-up efforts, led to increases in linkage to care and treatment. Co-localisation of testing and care with substance-use services, especially if residential, is a viable, low-barrier strategy for increasing linkage to care among WWUD.