RESUMO
Lack of access to resources is a "fundamental cause" of poor HIV outcomes across the care cascade globally and may have the greatest impact on groups with co-existing marginalized identities. In a sample of people living with HIV (PWH) who inject drugs and were not on antiretroviral therapy (ART), we explored associations between access to resources and HIV severity. Fundamental Cause Theory (FCT) sees socioeconomic status/access to resources as a root cause of disease and emphasizes that individuals with limited resources have fewer means to mitigate health risks and implement protective behaviors, which ultimately generates disparities in health outcomes. Guided by the FCT, we hypothesized that resource depletion (primary aim) and lower income (secondary aim) were associated with increased HIV severity. Using baseline data from the Linking Infectious and Narcology Care (LINC-II) trial of ART-naive PWH who inject drugs in St. Petersburg, Russia (n = 225), we examined the association between "past year resource runout" (yes vs. no) and "low-income (< 300 USD a month)" and the outcome HIV severity (CD4 count, continuous). We fit two separate linear regression models adjusted for gender, age, time since HIV diagnosis, and prior ART use. Participants had a mean age of 37.5 years and were 60% male. Two thirds (66%) reported resource depletion, and 30% had income below 300 USD a month. Average CD4 count was 416 cells/mm3 (SD 285). No significant association was identified between either resource depletion or low-income and HIV severity (adjusted mean difference in CD4 count for resource depletion: - 4.16, 95% CI - 82.93, 74.62; adjusted mean difference in CD4 count for low-income: 68.13, 95% CI - 15.78, 152.04). Below-average income and running out of resources were common among PWH who inject drugs and are not on ART in St. Petersburg, Russia. Resource depletion and low-income were not significantly associated with HIV disease severity as captured by CD4 count. The nuanced relationship between socioeconomic status and HIV severity among people with HIV who inject drugs and not on ART merits further examination in a larger sample.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Oral anticoagulants are highly efficacious for the prevention of stroke in atrial fibrillation, and are the preferred treatment by current guidelines. The purpose of our study was to assess the utilization of antithrombotic drugs in atrial fibrillation patients at the time of ischemic stroke and the factors associated with their use. METHODS: We enrolled 759 consecutive patients admitted with ischemic stroke at Boston Medical Center, Geisinger Health System, and the University of Alabama. To be eligible, patients had to have electrocardiographically-confirmed atrial fibrillation at the time of admission or within 6 months of the index stroke. All stroke events and electrocardiograms were validated by study physicians. Patients with newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation were not eligible. RESULTS: The mean age was 78 years, 43% were male, 19% black, and the mean CHADS2 score is 3.0. Atrial fibrillation was paroxysmal in 31%. At presentation, 181 (24%) patients were taking warfarin only, 96 (13%) both warfarin and aspirin, 294 (39%) aspirin alone, and 189 (25%) no antithrombotic therapy. The mean international normalized ratio was 1.6. Among patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation, one in five was taking warfarin. Although increasing stroke risk was associated with a greater likelihood of warfarin use, only 39% of highest risk CHADS2 3-6 were taking warfarin at the time of stroke. CONCLUSIONS: Among high-risk individuals with atrial fibrillation, only 37% were taking warfarin at the time of stroke. Paroxysmal atrial fibrillation was associated with the highest risk of not receiving warfarin.
