Diagnostic accuracy of a point-of-care urine tenofovir assay, and associations with HIV viraemia and drug resistance among people receiving dolutegravir and efavirenz-based antiretroviral therapy.

INTRODUCTION: Novel point-of-care assays which measure urine tenofovir (TFV) concentrations may have a role in improving adherence monitoring for people living with HIV (PLHIV) receiving antiretroviral therapy (ART). However, further studies of their diagnostic accuracy, and whether results are associated with viraemia and drug resistance, are needed to guide their use, particularly in the context of the global dolutegravir rollout. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional evaluation among PLHIV receiving first-line ART containing tenofovir disoproxil fumarate at enrolment into a randomized trial in two South African public sector clinics. We calculated the diagnostic accuracy of the Abbott point-of-care immunoassay to detect urine TFV compared to liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS). We evaluated the association between point-of-care urine TFV results and self-reported adherence, viraemia ≥1000 copies/ml and HIV drug resistance, among people receiving either efavirenz or dolutegravir-based ART. RESULTS: Between August 2020 and March 2022, we enrolled 124 participants. The median age was 39 (IQR 34-45) years, 55% were women, 74 (59.7%) were receiving efavirenz and 50 (40.3%) dolutegravir. The sensitivity and specificity of the immunoassay to detect urine TFV ≥1500 ng/ml compared to LC-MS/MS were 96.1% (95% CI 90.0-98.8) and 95.2% (75.3-100.0), respectively. Urine TFV results were associated with short (p<0.001) and medium-term (p = 0.036) self-reported adherence. Overall, 44/124 (35.5%) had viraemia, which was associated with undetectable TFV in those receiving efavirenz (OR 6.01, 1.27-39.0, p = 0.014) and dolutegravir (OR 25.7, 4.20-294.8, p<0.001). However, in those with viraemia while receiving efavirenz, 8/27 (29.6%) had undetectable urine TFV, compared to 11/17 (64.7%) of those receiving dolutegravir. Drug resistance was detected in 23/27 (85.2%) of those receiving efavirenz and only 1/16 (6.3%) of those receiving dolutegravir. There was no association between urine TFV results and drug resistance. CONCLUSIONS: Among PLHIV receiving ART, a rapid urine TFV immunoassay can be used to accurately monitor urine TFV levels compared to the gold standard of LC-MS/MS. Undetectable point-of-care urine TFV results were associated with viraemia, particularly among people receiving dolutegravir. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Pan-African Clinical Trials Registry: PACTR202001785886049.

Mental healthcare clinician engagement with point of care testing; a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Point of Care Testing (POCT) is being increasingly used to augment the delivery of physical health care in a variety of settings, but their use in mental health has been limited. Research into understanding the barriers faced for successful implementation of POCT in these settings is lacking. We aimed to identify factors affecting engagement and implementation of POCT within mental health teams by exploring the attitudes to POCT, and the perceived impact POCT has on the practice of mental healthcare clinicians. METHODS: Alongside a study evaluating the impact of a point of care device in Community Mental Health Teams (CMHTs), qualitative interviews were carried out with CMHT clinicians using POCT as part of annual physical checks for patients with severe and enduring mental illness. Data were collected using semi-structured interviews and analysed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Fifteen clinicians were interviewed across a range of professional backgrounds. Clinicians identified usability of the technology, positive impact on their patient's experience and improved self-efficacy as drivers for successful implementation of POCT into their clinical practice. Issues with device functioning and the potential for a negative effect on the therapeutic relationship with their patients were identified as barriers. Level of physical heath training was not found to be a barrier by mental health professionals to using POCT. CONCLUSIONS: Understanding barriers and drivers for engagement is important to allow co-production of POCT and guidelines to facilitate introduction of POCT into routine clinical practice.

Attitudes to physical healthcare in severe mental illness; a patient and mental health clinician qualitative interview study.

BACKGROUND: People with severe mental illness experience physical health significantly worse than the general population. Physical health monitoring is shared between primary care and secondary mental healthcare services, though there is debate whether mental health teams should provide more physical healthcare. The views of mental health clinicians and patients with mental illness towards physical healthcare provision are unclear. AIMS: To explore the attitudes of Community Mental Health Team (CMHT) clinicians and patients experiencing severe mental illness towards physical healthcare and its provision. DESIGN AND SETTING: Qualitative study in a CMHT setting. METHODS: Interviews were carried out with CMHT clinicians and patients with severe mental illness. Data were collected using semi-structured interviews and analysed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: There were 14 patients and 15 clinicians recruited. Patients varied in their awareness of the association between physical and mental health, but were engaged in physical health monitoring. Clinicians were aware of the importance of physical healthcare but reported barriers to provision, including lack of training, resource constraints and uncertainty in their role. There was no consensus in either group regarding how physical healthcare should be provided, with diverse attitudes expressed for why CMHTs should and shouldn't provide more physical healthcare. CONCLUSIONS: Increasing physical healthcare provision from mental health teams requires healthcare-related barriers be addressed, but it remains unclear whether CMHT clinicians or patients believe this to be a solution.

Effect of point of care blood testing on physical health check completion in mental health services: mixed-methods evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Physical health outcomes in severe mental illness are worse than in the general population. Routine physical health check completion in this group is poor. AIMS: To quantitatively and qualitatively evaluate the impact of point of care (POC) blood testing on physical health check completion in community mental health services. METHOD: In a prospective cohort design, we equipped an early intervention service (EIS) and a community mental health team (CMHT) with a POC blood testing device for 6 months. We compared rates of blood test and full physical health check completion in the intervention teams with a matched EIS and CMHT, historically and during the intervention. We explored attitudes to POC testing using thematic analysis of semi-structured interviews with patients and clinicians. RESULTS: Although the CMHT scarcely used the POC device and saw no change in outcomes, direct comparison of testing rates in the intervention period showed increased physical health check completion in the EIS with the device (rate ratio RR = 5.18; 95% CI 2.54-12.44; P < 0.001) compared with usual care. The rate was consistent with the EIS's increasing rate of testing over time (RR = 0.45; 95% 0.09-2.08; P = 0.32). Similar trends were seen in blood test completion. POC testing was acceptable to patients but clinicians reported usability, provision and impact on the therapeutic relationship as barriers to uptake. CONCLUSIONS: POC testing was beneficial and acceptable to patients and may increase physical health check uptake. Further research, accounting for clinician barriers, is needed to evaluate its clinical and cost-effectiveness.

Preferential selection of IMP and VIM metallo-beta-lactamases by imipenem in Pseudomonas aeruginosa.

Mixed populations of Pseudomonas aeruginosa, comprising a carbapenem-susceptible and a carbapenem-resistant strain, containing either the IMP or VIM beta-lactamases, were exposed to imipenem. They developed resistance to both imipenem and meropenem. When the same mixed populations were exposed to meropenem, only the mixture containing the VIM beta-lactamases became resistant to both carbapenems.