Cost and Cost-Effectiveness of Incentives for Viral Suppression in People Living with HIV.

Only 63% of people living with HIV in the United States are achieving viral suppression. Structural and social barriers limit adherence to antiretroviral therapy which furthers the HIV epidemic while increasing health care costs. This study calculated the cost and cost-effectiveness of a contingency management intervention with cash incentives. People with HIV and detectable viral loads were randomized to usual care or an incentive group. Individuals could earn up to $3650 per year if they achieved and maintained an undetectable viral load. The average 1-year intervention cost, including incentives, was $4105 per patient. The average health care costs were $27,189 per patient in usual care and $35,853 per patient in the incentive group. We estimated a cost of $28,888 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained, which is well below accepted cost-per-QALY thresholds. Contingency management with cash incentives is a cost-effective intervention for significantly increasing viral suppression.

New COVID-19 Cases and Hospitalizations Among Adults, by Vaccination Status - New York, May 3-July 25, 2021.

Data from randomized clinical trials and real-world observational studies show that all three COVID-19 vaccines currently authorized for emergency use by the Food and Drug Administration* are safe and highly effective for preventing COVID-19-related serious illness, hospitalization, and death (1,2). Studies of vaccine effectiveness (VE) for preventing new infections and hospitalizations attributable to SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19), particularly as the B.1.617.2 (Delta) variant has become predominant, are limited in the United States (3). In this study, the New York State Department of Health linked statewide immunization, laboratory testing, and hospitalization databases for New York to estimate rates of new laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases and hospitalizations by vaccination status among adults, as well as corresponding VE for full vaccination in the population, across all three authorized vaccine products. During May 3-July 25, 2021, the overall age-adjusted VE against new COVID-19 cases for all adults declined from 91.7% to 79.8%. During the same period, the overall age-adjusted VE against hospitalization was relatively stable, ranging from 91.9% to 95.3%. Currently authorized vaccines have high effectiveness against COVID-19 hospitalization, but effectiveness against new cases appears to have declined in recent months, coinciding with the Delta variant's increase from <2% to >80% in the U.S. region that includes New York and relaxation of masking and physical distancing recommendations. To reduce new COVID-19 cases and hospitalizations, these findings support the implementation of a layered approach centered on vaccination, as well as other prevention strategies such as masking and physical distancing.

New COVID-19 Cases and Hospitalizations Among Adults, by Vaccination Status - New York, May 3-July 25, 2021.

Data from randomized clinical trials and real-world observational studies show that all three COVID-19 vaccines currently authorized for emergency use by the Food and Drug Administration* are safe and highly effective for preventing COVID-19-related serious illness, hospitalization, and death (1,2). Studies of vaccine effectiveness (VE) for preventing new infections and hospitalizations attributable to SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19), particularly as the B.1.617.2 (Delta) variant has become predominant, are limited in the United States (3). In this study, the New York State Department of Health linked statewide immunization, laboratory testing, and hospitalization databases for New York to estimate rates of new laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases and hospitalizations by vaccination status among adults, as well as corresponding VE for full vaccination in the population, across all three authorized vaccine products. During May 3-July 25, 2021, the overall age-adjusted VE against new COVID-19 cases for all adults declined from 91.8% to 75.0%. During the same period, the overall age-adjusted VE against hospitalization was relatively stable, ranging from 89.5% to 95.1%. Currently authorized vaccines have high effectiveness against COVID-19 hospitalization, but effectiveness against new cases appears to have declined in recent months, coinciding with the Delta variant's increase from <2% to >80% in the U.S. region that includes New York and relaxation of masking and physical distancing recommendations. To reduce new COVID-19 cases and hospitalizations, these findings support the implementation of a layered approach centered on vaccination, as well as other prevention strategies such as masking and physical distancing.

COVID-19 Testing, Epidemic Features, Hospital Outcomes, and Household Prevalence, New York State-March 2020.

BACKGROUND: The US' coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) epidemic has grown extensively since February 2020, with substantial associated hospitalizations and mortality; New York State has emerged as the national epicenter. We report on the extent of testing and test results during the month of March in New York State, along with risk factors, outcomes, and household prevalence among initial cases subject to in-depth investigations. METHODS: Specimen collection for COVID-19 testing was conducted in healthcare settings, community-based collection sites, and by home testing teams. Information on demographics, risk factors, and hospital outcomes of cases was obtained through epidemiological investigations and an electronic medical records match, and summarized descriptively. Active testing of initial case's households enabled estimation of household prevalence. RESULTS: During March in New York State, outside of New York City, a total of 47 326 persons tested positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, out of 141 495 tests (33% test-positive), with the highest number of cases located in the metropolitan region counties. Among 229 initial cases diagnosed through 12 March, by 30 March 13% were hospitalized and 2% died. Testing conducted among 498 members of these case's households found prevalent infection among 57%, excluding first-reported cases 38%. In these homes, we found a significant age gradient in prevalence, from 23% among those < 5 years to 68% among those ≥ 65 years (P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: New York State faced a substantial and increasing COVID-19 outbreak during March 2020. The earliest cases had high levels of infection in their households and by the end of the month, the risks of hospitalization and death were high.

Core Elements of a National COVID-19 Strategy: Lessons Learned from the US National HIV/AIDS Strategy.

COVID-19 has caused devastating health consequences and social inequities globally and in the United States. Unfortunately, the US has not developed a comprehensive National COVID-19 Strategy. In this editorial, we briefly review lessons about the development, structure, implementation and evaluation of the National HIV/AIDS Strategy (NHAS) for the US, and use these lessons to inform an initial proposal for a timely, dynamic, evidence-based, participatory, comprehensive and impactful National COVID-19 Strategy. Without such a strategy, the national response to the COVID-19 pandemic will remain uneven across jurisdictions and less than optimally impactful on disease-related mortality, short- and long-term morbidity, and health and social inequities.

Exploring the evolution of engagement between academic public health researchers and decision-makers: from initiation to dissolution.

CONTEXT: Relationships between researchers and decision-makers have demonstrated positive potential to influence research, policy and practice. Over time, interest in better understanding the relationships between the two parties has grown as demonstrated by a plethora of studies globally. However, what remains elusive is the evolution of these vital relationships and what can be learned from them with respect to advancing evidence-informed decision-making. We therefore explored the nuances around the initiation, maintenance and dissolution of academic-government relationships. METHODS: We conducted in-depth interviews with 52 faculty at one school of public health and 24 government decision-makers at city, state, federal and global levels. Interviews were transcribed and coded deductively and inductively using Atlas.Ti. Responses across codes and respondents were extracted into an Excel matrix and compared in order to identify key themes. FINDINGS: Eight key drivers to engagement were identified, namely (1) decision-maker research needs, (2) learning, (3) access to resources, (4) student opportunities, (5) capacity strengthening, (6) strategic positioning, (7) institutional conditionalities, and (8) funder conditionalities. There were several elements that enabled initiation of relationships, including the role of faculty members in the decision-making process, individual attributes and reputation, institutional reputation, social capital, and the role of funders. Maintenance of partnerships was dependent on factors such as synergistic collaboration (i.e. both benefit), mutual trust, contractual issues and funding. Dissolution of relationships resulted from champions changing/leaving positions, engagement in transactional relationships, or limited mutual trust and respect. CONCLUSIONS: As universities and government agencies establish relationships and utilise opportunities to share ideas, envision change together, and leverage their collaborations to use evidence to inform decision-making, a new modus operandi becomes possible. Embracing the individual, institutional, networked and systems dynamics of relationships can lead to new practices, alternate approaches and transformative change. Government agencies, schools of public health and higher education institutions more broadly, should pay deliberate attention to identifying and managing the various drivers, enablers and disablers for relationship initiation and resilience in order to promote more evidence-informed decision-making.

Association of Treatment With Hydroxychloroquine or Azithromycin With In-Hospital Mortality in Patients With COVID-19 in New York State.

Importance: Hydroxychloroquine, with or without azithromycin, has been considered as a possible therapeutic agent for patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, there are limited data on efficacy and associated adverse events. Objective: To describe the association between use of hydroxychloroquine, with or without azithromycin, and clinical outcomes among hospital inpatients diagnosed with COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: Retrospective multicenter cohort study of patients from a random sample of all admitted patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 in 25 hospitals, representing 88.2% of patients with COVID-19 in the New York metropolitan region. Eligible patients were admitted for at least 24 hours between March 15 and 28, 2020. Medications, preexisting conditions, clinical measures on admission, outcomes, and adverse events were abstracted from medical records. The date of final follow-up was April 24, 2020. Exposures: Receipt of both hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin, hydroxychloroquine alone, azithromycin alone, or neither. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes were cardiac arrest and abnormal electrocardiogram findings (arrhythmia or QT prolongation). Results: Among 1438 hospitalized patients with a diagnosis of COVID-19 (858 [59.7%] male, median age, 63 years), those receiving hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, or both were more likely than those not receiving either drug to have diabetes, respiratory rate >22/min, abnormal chest imaging findings, O2 saturation lower than 90%, and aspartate aminotransferase greater than 40 U/L. Overall in-hospital mortality was 20.3% (95% CI, 18.2%-22.4%). The probability of death for patients receiving hydroxychloroquine + azithromycin was 189/735 (25.7% [95% CI, 22.3%-28.9%]), hydroxychloroquine alone, 54/271 (19.9% [95% CI, 15.2%-24.7%]), azithromycin alone, 21/211 (10.0% [95% CI, 5.9%-14.0%]), and neither drug, 28/221 (12.7% [95% CI, 8.3%-17.1%]). In adjusted Cox proportional hazards models, compared with patients receiving neither drug, there were no significant differences in mortality for patients receiving hydroxychloroquine + azithromycin (HR, 1.35 [95% CI, 0.76-2.40]), hydroxychloroquine alone (HR, 1.08 [95% CI, 0.63-1.85]), or azithromycin alone (HR, 0.56 [95% CI, 0.26-1.21]). In logistic models, compared with patients receiving neither drug cardiac arrest was significantly more likely in patients receiving hydroxychloroquine + azithromycin (adjusted OR, 2.13 [95% CI, 1.12-4.05]), but not hydroxychloroquine alone (adjusted OR, 1.91 [95% CI, 0.96-3.81]) or azithromycin alone (adjusted OR, 0.64 [95% CI, 0.27-1.56]), . In adjusted logistic regression models, there were no significant differences in the relative likelihood of abnormal electrocardiogram findings. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients hospitalized in metropolitan New York with COVID-19, treatment with hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, or both, compared with neither treatment, was not significantly associated with differences in in-hospital mortality. However, the interpretation of these findings may be limited by the observational design.

Data-Driven Goals for Curbing the U.S. HIV Epidemic by 2030.

Progress in reducing HIV infections has been suboptimal despite availability of effective prevention and treatment interventions and national strategies to bring them to scale. As part of a community-driven process, we expanded previous epidemiologic models using updated surveillance data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to estimate quantitative parameters for ambitious but attainable national HIV prevention goals. We estimated new HIV infections could be reduced by up to 67% and prevalence could begin to decline by 2030 if 95% targets for diagnosis, care retention, and viral suppression are met by 2025 and an additional 20% of transmissions are averted through targeted interventions such as pre-exposure prophylaxis. Notably, this would require the percentage of diagnosed persons retained in HIV care to increase by more than 35 percentage points, which would necessitate innovative models and a substantial expansion of supportive services. Although the HIV incidence reduction goal of 90% as unveiled in the 2019 State of the Union Address is likely unachievable with the current intervention toolkit, it is possible to begin to substantially reduce HIV prevalence in the next decade with sufficient investments and innovation.

A Cost and Cost-Threshold Analysis of Implementation of an Evidence-Based Intervention for HIV-Serodiscordant Couples.

To address gaps in the cost literature by estimating the cost of delivering an evidence-based HIV risk reduction intervention for HIV-serodiscordant, heterosexual, African American couples (Eban II) and calculating the cost-effective thresholds at three participating sites. The cost, cost-saving, and cost-effectiveness thresholds for Eban II were calculated using standard methods. The analytic time period was from July 1 to September 31, 2014. Total costs for 3 months of program implementation were from $13,747 to $25,937, with societal costs ranging from $5632 to $17,008 and program costs ranging from $8115 to $14,122. The costs per participant were from $1621 to $2160; the cost per session (per participant) ranged from $147 to $196. Sites had achievable cost-saving thresholds, which were all less than one for the 3-month costing timeframe.

Cost-Utility of Access to Care, a National HIV Linkage, Re-engagement and Retention in Care Program.

Linkage to HIV medical care and on-going engagement in HIV medical care are vital for ending the HIV epidemic. However, little is known about the cost-utility of HIV linkage, re-engagement and retention (LRC) in care programs. This paper presents the cost-utility analysis of Access to Care, a national HIV LRC program. Using standard methods from the US Panel on Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine, we calculated the cost-utility ratio. Seven Access to Care programs were cost-effective and two were cost-saving. This study adds to a small but growing body of evidence to support the cost-effectiveness of LRC programs.

An Online Risk Index for the Cross-Sectional Prediction of New HIV Chlamydia, and Gonorrhea Diagnoses Across U.S. Counties and Across Years.

The present study evaluated the potential use of Twitter data for providing risk indices of STIs. We developed online risk indices (ORIs) based on tweets to predict new HIV, gonorrhea, and chlamydia diagnoses, across U.S. counties and across 5 years. We analyzed over one hundred million tweets from 2009 to 2013 using open-vocabulary techniques and estimated the ORIs for a particular year by entering tweets from the same year into multiple semantic models (one for each year). The ORIs were moderately to strongly associated with the actual rates (.35 < rs < .68 for 93% of models), both nationwide and when applied to single states (California, Florida, and New York). Later models were slightly better than older ones at predicting gonorrhea and chlamydia, but not at predicting HIV. The proposed technique using free social media data provides signals of community health at a high temporal and spatial resolution.

Factors affecting engagement between academic faculty and decision-makers: learnings and priorities for a school of public health.

BACKGROUND: Schools of public health (SPHs) are increasingly being recognised as important contributors of human, social and intellectual capital relevant to health policy and decision-making. Few studies within the implementation science literature have systematically examined knowledge exchange experiences within this specific organisational context. The purpose of this study was therefore to elicit whether documented facilitators and barriers to engaging with government decision-makers resonates within an academic SPH context. We sought to understand the variations in such experiences at four different levels of government decision-making. Furthermore, we sought to elicit intervention priorities as identified by faculty. METHODS: Between May and December 2016, 211 (34%) of 627 eligible full-time faculty across one SPH in the United States of America participated in a survey on engagement with decision-makers at the city, state, federal and global government levels. Surveys were administered face-to-face or via Skype. Descriptive data as well as tests of association and logistic regression analyses were conducted using STATA. RESULTS: Over three-quarters of respondents identified colleagues with ties to decision-makers, institutional affiliation and conducting policy-relevant research as the highest facilitators. Several identified time constraints, academic incentives and financial support as important contributors to engagement. Faculty characteristics, such as research areas of expertise, career track and faculty rank, were found to be statistically significantly associated with facilitators. The top three intervention priorities that emerged were (1) creating incentives for engagement, (2) providing funding for engagement and (3) inculcating an institutional culture around engagement. CONCLUSIONS: The data suggest that five principal categories of factors - individual characteristics, institutional environment, relational dynamics, research focus and funder policies - affect the willingness and ability of academic faculty to engage with government decision-makers. This study suggests that SPHs could enhance the relevance of their role in health policy decision-making by (1) periodically measuring engagement with decision-makers; (2) enhancing individual capacity in knowledge translation and communication, taking faculty characteristics into account; (3) institutionalising a culture that supports policies and practices for engagement in decision-making processes; and (4) creating a strategy to expand and nurture trusted, relevant networks and relationships with decision-makers.

States' Methods for Capturing and Reporting Local Responses to Suspected Nonfatal Drug Overdoses.

This study examines the available data used to surveil state-level drug overdoses and characterizes them based on their timeliness, drug involvement, and specification of nonfatal outcomes.

A 2023 Agenda for Substance Use Prevention and Treatment in the US.

In this Viewpoint, officials from the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy describe 3 actions that health care personnel can take to expand prevention and treatment of substance misuse and overdose.

Presidential Elections and HIV-Related National Policies and Programs.

The November 2016 general election and subsequent voting of the Electoral College resulted in the selection of Donald Trump as President of the United States. The incoming Administration ran a campaign that indicated a desire for substantial change in health policy, including the repeal of the Affordable Care Act (ACA). President Trump has said very little directly about HIV programs and policies, but some campaign positions (such as the repeal of the ACA) would clearly and substantially impact the lives of persons living with HIV. In this editorial, we highlight important HIV-related goals to which we must recommit ourselves, and we underscore several key points about evidence-based advocacy that are important to revisit at any time (but most especially when there is a change in Administration).