RESUMEN
As the COVID-19 pandemic began in 2020, significant public health mitigation efforts were vital to combat an unprecedented health crisis. These efforts, which involved social distancing and self-quarantine, likely worsened a public health crisis of social isolation and loneliness in the U.S., particularly among people with HIV (PWH). Multidisciplinary HIV care centers, which served as the main source of clinical care for PWH and in some cases the only point of social contact, faced evolving dynamics of in-person visits during the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as a shift to telehealth services. Using in-depth interviews, we explored the role that multidisciplinary HIV care centers and providers played in the experience of social isolation among PWH in New York City. We recruited participants (n = 30) from a multidisciplinary HIV care center in NYC between October 2020 and June 2021. We conducted semi-structured interviews to understand the specific domains of social isolation that were mitigated. In this cohort, the major theme that drove both in-person and telehealth care continuity was the strength of the patient-provider relationship. We found that participants saw members of the HIV care center as part of their social network, and providers served both as a source of emotional support and provided important social resources and benefits. Thus, in times of heightened social isolation, HIV care centers can play a critical role in providing social support in addition to clinical care.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: To end the HIV epidemic, we need to better understand how to address HIV-related stigmas in healthcare settings, specifically the common theoretical bases across interventions so that we can generalize about their potential effectiveness. PURPOSE: We describe theory-based components of stigma interventions by identifying their functions/types, techniques, and purported mechanisms of change. METHODS: This systematic review examined studies published by April 2021. We applied a transtheoretical ontology developed by the Human Behaviour Change Project, consisting of 9 intervention types (ITs), 93 behavior change techniques (BCTs), and 26 mechanisms of action (MOAs). We coded the frequency and calculated the potential effectiveness of each IT, BCT, and MOA. We evaluated study quality with a 10-item adapted tool. RESULTS: Among the nine highest quality studies, indicated by the use of an experimental design, the highest potentially effective IT was "Persuasion" (i.e. using communication to induce emotions and/or stimulate action; 66.7%, 4/6 studies). The highest potentially effective BCTs were "Behavioral practice/rehearsal" (i.e. to increase habit and skill) and "Salience of consequences" (i.e. to make consequences of behavior more memorable; each 100%, 3/3 studies). The highest potentially effective MOAs were "Knowledge" (i.e. awareness) and "Beliefs about capabilities" (i.e. self-efficacy; each 67%, 2/3 studies). CONCLUSIONS: By applying a behavior change ontology across studies, we synthesized theory-based findings on stigma interventions. Interventions typically combined more than one IT, BCT, and MOA. Practitioners and researchers can use our findings to better understand and select theory-based components of interventions, including areas for further evaluation, to expedite ending the HIV epidemic.