Integrated opioid substitution therapy and HIV care: a qualitative systematic review and synthesis of client and provider experiences.

People who use drugs in many contexts have limited access to opioid substitution therapy and HIV care. Service integration is one strategy identified to support increased access. We reviewed and synthesized literature exploring client and provider experiences of integrated opioid substitution therapy and HIV care to identify acceptable approaches to care delivery. We systematically reviewed qualitative literature. We searched nine bibliographic databases, supplemented by manual searches of reference lists of articles from the database search, relevant journals, conferences, key organizations and consultation with experts. Thematic synthesis was used to develop descriptive themes in client and provider experiences. The search yielded 11 articles for inclusion, along with 8 expert and policy reports. We identify five descriptive themes: the convenience and comprehensive nature of co-located care, contrasting care philosophies and their role in shaping integration, the limits to disclosure and communication between clients and providers, opioid substitution therapy enabling HIV care access and engagement, and health system challenges to delivering integrated services. The discussion explores how integrated opioid substitution therapy and HIV care needs to adapt to specific social conditions, rather than following universal approaches. We identify priorities for future research. Acceptable integrated opioid substitution therapy and HIV care for people who use drugs and providers is most likely through co-located care and relies upon attention to stigma, supportive relationships and client centred cultures of delivery. Further research is needed to understand experiences of integrated care, particularly delivery in low and middle income settings and models of care focused on community and non-clinic based delivery.

Commentary: the value of PrEP for people who inject drugs.

INTRODUCTION: The offer of pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is recommended as an additional option for HIV prevention for people at substantial risk of HIV infection as part of combination HIV prevention approaches. Implementing this depends on integrating PrEP in public health programmes that address risky practices with evidence-based interventions, and that operate in an enabling legal and policy environment for the delivery of health services to those at higher risk of HIV infection. What does this recommendation mean in terms of the diverse range of HIV prevention needs of key populations, some of whom are so discriminated against that they exist essentially outside formal systems such as national public health services, and for whom a substantial risk of HIV is part of a larger adverse and hostile situation? We discuss this question with reference to people who inject drugs, informed by concerns and comments that emerged from a series of consultations. DISCUSSION: HIV prevention is part of a spectrum of injecting drug users' priorities, and their access and uptake of HIV prevention services is contingent on their wider "risk environment." The need to address structural barriers to services and human rights violations, and to improve access to comprehensive harm reduction programmes are of prime importance and would have higher value than a mono-focus on HIV prevention. Where existing harm reduction activities are inadequate, fragile or dependent on external donors, shifts in funding priorities, including, for example, towards PrEP, could threaten investment in the broader programmes. For these reasons, it cannot be assumed that PrEP promotion will always be supported by people who inject drugs.The sexual partners of people who inject drugs, non-opioid users who also inject and for whom there is no established substitution treatment, as well as drug users who are unable to negotiate safe sex may value PrEP. As for all key populations, the involvement of people who inject drugs in shaping services for their consumption is vital and too often ignored. CONCLUSIONS: For people who inject drugs and who experience discrimination, violence or harassment, implementation of PrEP should be guided by understanding and engaging with their interconnected range of needs, risk practices, priorities and options. The differentiated needs of sub-populations that inject a range of drugs, and their sexual partners, require further exploration.

Impact of Opioid Substitution Therapy on Antiretroviral Therapy Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected people who inject drugs (PWID) frequently encounter barriers accessing and remaining on antiretroviral therapy (ART). Some studies have suggested that opioid substitution therapy (OST) could facilitate PWID's engagement with HIV services. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the impact of concurrent OST use on ART-related outcomes among HIV-infected PWID. METHODS: We searched Medline, PsycInfo, Embase, Global Health, Cochrane, Web of Science, and Social Policy and Practice databases for studies between 1996 to November 2014 documenting the impact of OST, compared to no OST, on ART outcomes. Outcomes considered were coverage and recruitment onto ART, adherence, viral suppression, attrition from ART, and mortality. Meta-analyses were conducted using random-effects modeling, and heterogeneity assessed using Cochran Q test and I(2) statistic. RESULTS: We identified 4685 articles, and 32 studies conducted in North America, Europe, Indonesia, and China were included. OST was associated with a 69% increase in recruitment onto ART (hazard ratio [HR], 1.69; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.32-2.15), a 54% increase in ART coverage (odds ratio [OR], 1.54; 95% CI, 1.17-2.03), a 2-fold increase in adherence (OR, 2.14; 95% CI, 1.41-3.26), and a 23% decrease in the odds of attrition (OR, 0.77; 95% CI, .63-.95). OST was associated with a 45% increase in odds of viral suppression (OR, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.21-1.73), but there was limited evidence from 6 studies for OST decreasing mortality for PWID on ART (HR, 0.91; 95% CI, .65-1.25). CONCLUSIONS: These findings support the use of OST, and its integration with HIV services, to improve the HIV treatment and care continuum among HIV-infected PWID.

The Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria's investments in harm reduction through the rounds-based funding model (2002-2014).

BACKGROUND: Harm reduction is an evidence-based, effective response to HIV transmission and other harms faced by people who inject drugs, and is explicitly supported by the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria. In spite of this, people who inject drugs continue to have poor and inequitable access to these services and face widespread stigma and discrimination. In 2013, the Global Fund launched a new funding model-signalling the end of the previous rounds-based model that had operated since its founding in 2002. This study updates previous analyses to assess Global Fund investments in harm reduction interventions for the duration of the rounds-based model, from 2002 to 2014. METHODS: Global Fund HIV and TB/HIV grant documents from 2002 to 2014 were reviewed to identify grants that contained activities for people who inject drugs. Data were collected from detailed grant budgets, and relevant budget lines were recorded and analysed to determine the resources allocated to different interventions that were specifically targeted at people who inject drugs. RESULTS: 151 grants for 58 countries, plus one regional proposal, contained activities targeting people who inject drugs-for a total investment of US$ 620 million. Two-thirds of this budgeted amount was for interventions in the "comprehensive package" defined by the United Nations. 91% of the identified amount was for Eastern Europe and Asia. CONCLUSION: This study represents an updated, comprehensive assessment of Global Fund investments in harm reduction from its founding (2002) until the start of the new funding model (2014). It also highlights the overall shortfall of harm reduction funding, with the estimated global need being US$ 2.3 billion for harm reduction in 2015 alone. Using this baseline, the Global Fund must carefully monitor its new funding model and ensure that investments in harm reduction are maintained or scaled-up. There are widespread concerns regarding the withdrawal from middle-income countries where harm reduction remains essential and unfunded through other sources: for example, 15% of the identified investments were for countries which are now ineligible for Global Fund support.

The impact of community mobilisation on HIV prevention in middle and low income countries: a systematic review and critique.

While community mobilisation (CM) is increasingly advocated for HIV prevention, its impact on measurable outcomes has not been established. We performed a systematic review of the impact of CM within HIV prevention interventions (N = 20), on biomedical, behavioural and social outcomes. Among most at risk groups (particularly sex workers), the evidence is somewhat consistent, indicating a tendency for positive impact, with stronger results for behavioural and social outcomes than for biomedical ones. Among youth and general communities, the evidence remains inconclusive. Success appears to be enhanced by engaging groups with a strong collective identity and by simultaneously addressing the socio-political context. We suggest that the inconclusiveness of the findings reflects problems with the evidence, rather than indicating that CM is ineffective. We discuss weaknesses in the operationalization of CM, neglect of social context, and incompatibility between context-specific CM processes and the aspiration of review methodologies to provide simple, context-transcending answers.