Inequalities in use of hospitals for childbirth among rural women in sub-Saharan Africa: a comparative analysis of 18 countries using Demographic and Health Survey data.

INTRODUCTION: Rising facility births in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) mask inequalities in higher-level emergency care-typically in hospitals. Limited research has addressed hospital use in women at risk of or with complications, such as high parity, linked to poverty and rurality, for whom hospital care is essential. We aimed to address this gap, by comparatively assessing hospital use in rural SSA by wealth and parity. METHODS: Countries in SSA with a Demographic and Health Survey since 2015 were included. We assessed rural hospital childbirth stratifying by wealth (wealthier/poorer) and parity (nulliparity/high parity≥5), and their combination. We computed percentages, 95% CIs and percentage-point differences, by stratifier level. To compare hospital use across countries, we produced a composite index, including six utilisation and equality indicators. RESULTS: This cross-sectional study included 18 countries. In all, a minority of rural women used hospitals for childbirth (2%-29%). There were disparities by wealth and parity, and poorer, high-parity women used hospitals least. The poorer/wealthier difference in utilisation among high-parity women ranged between 1.3% (Mali) and 13.2% (Rwanda). We found use and equality of hospitals in rural settings were greater in Malawi and Liberia, followed by Zimbabwe, the Gambia and Rwanda. DISCUSSION: Inequalities identified across 18 countries in rural SSA indicate poor, higher-risk women of high parity had lower use of hospitals for childbirth. Specific policy attention is urgently needed for this group where disadvantage accumulates.

Out-of-Facility Multimonth Dispensing of Antiretroviral Treatment: A Pooled Analysis Using Individual Patient Data From Cluster-Randomized Trials in Southern Africa.

BACKGROUND: Out-of-facility multi-month dispensing (MMD) is a differentiated service delivery model which provides antiretroviral treatment (ART) at intervals of up to 6 monthly in the community. Limited randomized evidence investigating out-of-facility MMD is available. We evaluated participant outcomes and compared out-of-facility MMD models using data from cluster-randomized trials in Southern Africa. SETTING: Eight districts in Zimbabwe and Lesotho. METHODS: Individual-level participant data from 2 cluster-randomized trials that included stable adults receiving ART at 60 facilities were pooled. Both trials had 3 arms: ART collected 3-monthly at healthcare facilities (3MF, control); ART provided three-monthly in community ART groups (CAGs) (3MC); and ART provided 6-monthly in either CAGs or on an individual provider-patient basis (6MC). Participant retention, viral suppression and incidence of unscheduled facility visits were compared. RESULTS: Ten thousand one hundred thirty-six participants were included, 3817 (37.7%), 2893 (28.5%) and 3426 (33.8%) in arms 3MF, 3MC and 6MC, respectively. After 12 months, retention was non-inferior for 3MC (95.7%) vs. 3MF (95.0%) {adjusted risk difference (aRD) = 0.3 [95% confidence interval (CI): -0.8 to 1.4]}; and 6MC (95.1%) vs. 3MF [aRD = -0.2 (95% CI: -1.4 to 1.0)]. Retention was greater amongst intervention arm participants in CAGs versus 6MC participants not in CAGs, aRD = 1.5% (95% CI: 0.2% to 2.9%). Viral suppression was excellent (≥98%) and unscheduled facility visits were not increased in the intervention arms. CONCLUSIONS: Three and 6-monthly out-of-facility MMD was non-inferior versus facility-based care for stable ART patients. Out-of-facility 6-monthly MMD should incorporate small group peer support whenever possible. CLINICALTRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03238846 and NCT03438370.

Outcomes of Three- Versus Six-Monthly Dispensing of Antiretroviral Treatment (ART) for Stable HIV Patients in Community ART Refill Groups: A Cluster-Randomized Trial in Zimbabwe.

INTRODUCTION: Multimonth dispensing (MMD) of antiretroviral treatment (ART) aims to reduce patient-related barriers to access long-term treatment and improve health system efficiency. However, randomized evidence of its clinical effectiveness is lacking. We compared MMD within community ART refill groups (CARGs) vs. standard-of-care facility-based ART delivery in Zimbabwe. METHODS: A three-arm, cluster-randomized, pragmatic noninferiority trial was performed. Thirty health care facilities and associated CARGs were allocated to either ART collected three-monthly at facility (3MF, control); ART delivered three-monthly in CARGs (3MC); or ART delivered six-monthly in CARGs (6MC). Stable adults receiving ART ≥six months with baseline viral load (VL) <1000 copies/ml were eligible. Retention in ART care (primary outcome) and viral suppression (VS) 12 months after enrollment were compared, using regression models specified for clustering (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03238846). RESULTS: 4800 participants were recruited, 1919, 1335, and 1546 in arms 3MF, 3MC, and 6MC, respectively. For retention, the prespecified noninferiority limit (-3.25%, risk difference [RD]) was met for comparisons between all arms, 3MC (94.8%) vs. 3MF (93.0%), adjusted RD = 1.1% (95% CI: -0.5% to 2.8%); 6MC (95.5%) vs. 3MF: aRD = 1.2% (95% CI: -1.0% to 3.6%); and 6MC vs. 3MC: aRD = 0.1% (95% CI: -2.4% to 2.6%). VL completion at 12 months was 49%, 45%, and 8% in 3MF, 3MC, and 6MC, respectively. VS in 3MC (99.7%) was high and not different to 3MF (99.1%), relative risk = 1.0 (95% CI: 1.0-1.0). VS was marginally reduced in 6MC (92.9%) vs. 3MF, relative risk = 0.9 (95% CI: 0.9-1.0). CONCLUSION: Retention in CARGs receiving three- and six-monthly MMD was noninferior versus standard-of-care facility-based ART delivery. VS in 3MC was high. VS in six-monthly CARGs requires further evaluation.