Delivery and implementation of an algorithm for smoking cessation treatment for people living with HIV and AIDS.

Compared to the general population, persons living with HIV (PLWH) have higher rates of tobacco use and an increased risk of morbidity from tobacco-related diseases. We conducted a single-arm pilot study of the real-world feasibility of integrating a smoking cessation decisional algorithm within routine clinic visits to engage non-treatment-seeking smokers in smoking cessation therapies. Smokers had an initial study visit during routine care followed by phone contacts at one and three months. Participants completed a baseline survey, followed by the algorithm which resulted in a recommendation for a smoking cessation medication, which was prescribed during the visit. Follow-up phone surveys assessed changes in smoking behavior and use of cessation medications at 1 and 3 months. Participants' (N = 60) self-reported smoking decreased from a baseline average of 14.4 cigarettes/day to 7.1 cigarettes/day at 3 months (p = .001). Nicotine dependence (FTND) decreased from 5.6 at baseline to 3.6 at 3 months (p < .001). Twenty-seven (45%) made a 24-h quit attempt and 39 (65%) used cessation medication. Insurance prior-authorization delayed medication receipt for seven participants and insurance denial occurred for one. Motivational status did not significantly influence outcomes. The algorithm was successful in engaging participants to use cessation medications and change smoking behaviors.

Use of an Outreach Coordinator to Reengage and Retain Patients at Risk of Falling Out of HIV Care, Does the Amount of Time Matter?

Retention in care remains a major problem for people living with HIV and it is well known that retention in high quality HIV care improves clinical outcomes. This project used an outreach coordinator to perform phone and letter interventions to improve retention in patients at risk of falling out of care. Sixty-one (5%) patients were at risk in 2015 and received an intervention by the outreach coordinator. Fifty (82%) had a visit and 22 (36%) met the HRSA definition of retention. The mean time per patient was 59 min; therefore, it took 2.7 h to achieve each retained patient or 1.2 h for each patient with a visit. By calculation, minutes over 75 appeared to be the point of diminishing returns. Cost analysis resulted in a cost of less than $100 per patient.

Use of an Outreach Coordinator to Reengage and Retain Patients with HIV in Care.

It is well established that retention in high-quality care and regular visits with an HIV/AIDS provider improve outcomes for people living with HIV/AIDS (PLWHA). However, nationally and regionally in South Carolina, retention rates remain low. We piloted an outreach program focused on characterizing out of care (OOC) patients to identify PLWHA who were lost to care and attempt reengagement through phone call, letter, and home visit interventions. Primary outcomes were reengagement, defined as attendance to a clinic appointment, and retention in care, defined by the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) definition (two visits at least 90 days apart in 2015). There were 1242 adult clinic patients in 2014. A total of 233 patients were included in the OOC cohort, according to the inclusion criteria. Of these 233, the outreach coordinator found that a majority of patients, 119 (51%), were lost to care. Reengagement was seen in 52 (44%) patients lost to care, and among those who reengaged, 26 (50%) were retained in care in 2015. This report represents one of few interventions that target reengagement for patients who are lost to care. The use of an outreach coordinator was successful in reengaging and retaining patients in care. It represents an uncomplicated intervention, functional within the current clinic design and available funding structure of the Ryan White grant. Poor engagement and retention in care continue to be significant problems among PLWHA with resultant poor clinical outcomes. Continued focus on new interventions to improve retention in care is necessary to improve clinical outcomes.

Tobacco Use Patterns in a Southern US HIV Clinic.

OBJECTIVES: Smoking rates are two to three times higher among people living with HIV and AIDS compared with the general population, but the prevalence of tobacco use among this population in the Charleston, SC region has not been established. To understand cigarette use, previous quit attempts, historic use of cessation therapies, and interest in cessation, a quality improvement project was implemented to survey smoking behaviors among this population. METHODS: During January-May 2010, HIV-infected patients arriving to the Medical University of South Carolina Infectious Diseases clinic were asked to complete a survey. Clinical and sociodemographic data were collected and analyzed using χ(2), and one-way analysis of variance models. RESULTS: Of unduplicated clinic encounters, 514 (75%) of patients completed the smoking survey. Less than half of responders were current (205, 40%) or former (42, 8%) smokers, with smoking prevalence higher for Caucasian males. Among current smokers, 170 (85%) reported having ever attempted to quit with the majority making a quit attempt without medication therapy (143, 83%). Nearly half of all current smokers (97, 49%) reported an active interest in speaking with a physician about quitting. Smoking status did not have meaningful relationships with HIV biomarkers, even when stratified by race and gender. CONCLUSIONS: This study supports that high rates of smoking exist in the south among people living with HIV and AIDS and demonstrated a need for smoking cessation interventions among these patients. These data have potentiated the hiring of a clinical pharmacist to aid in implementation of smoking cessation therapies in a more systematic and formal way.

Laboratory markers slightly overestimate retention in HIV care among newly diagnosed individuals.

Patients who are retained in HIV care have a higher likelihood of viral suppression and increased survival. Lab markers have been used as surrogate markers for clinical visits to estimate retention, but the accuracy of these markers at predicting retention in care has not been validated. A retrospective cohort study was conducted using patients newly diagnosed with HIV in the Emergency Department of Interim Louisiana Public Hospital (ILPH). Retention in care was defined as two clinical visits to an HIV provider separated by at least three months within a one-year period as per the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) definition. Retention by lab markers was defined as two documented labs, either a CD4 count or an HIV viral load, separated by at least three months within the same one-year period. Ninety-nine patients were newly diagnosed with HIV; 36 patients (36%) were retained at 1 year using the HRSA definition and 40 patients (40%) using lab markers. The sensitivity and specificity of using lab markers among the newly diagnosed were 100% and 93.7%, respectively. The positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) were 90% and 100%, respectively. Among the 99 patients, 56 were linked to the HIV clinic associated with our hospital, of which 63% (36) were retained at year 1 using the HRSA definition and 70% (39) using lab markers. The sensitivity and specificity of using lab markers among linked patients were 100% and 85%, respectively. The PPV and NPV were 92% and 100%, respectively. Lab markers slightly overestimate currently accepted definitions of retention. While lab markers may be the easiest way to estimate retention at the population level, further study should be done before lab markers are accepted as the gold standard surrogate measure for retention.