Dataset Information

EHealth Communication With Clients at Community-Based HIV/AIDS Service Organizations in the Southern United States: Cross-Sectional Survey.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Providing HIV/STD testing and prevention education, medical and nonmedical case management, housing assistance, transportation services, and patient navigation are just a few examples of how community-based HIV/AIDS service organizations will help the United States realize the goals of the updated National HIV/AIDS Strategy. OBJECTIVE:In this study, the aim was to assess electronic data security confidence level, electronic communication behaviors, and interest in using eHealth communication tools with clients of staff at community-based HIV/AIDS service organizations. METHODS:Staff were recruited from 7 community-based HIV/AIDS service organizations in the southern United States (3 in South Carolina and 4 in Texas). The principal investigator used state department of health websites to identify community-based HIV/AIDS service organizations. Staff were included if they provided HIV/STD prevention education to clients. A recruitment letter was sent to community-based HIV/AIDS service organization leaders who then used snowball sampling to recruit eligible staff. Chi-square tests were used. RESULTS:Among staff (n=59) who participated in the study, 66% (39/59) were very or completely confident that safeguards are in place to keep electronically shared information from being seen by other people; 68% (40/59) used email, 58% (34/59) used text messages, 25% (15/59) used social media, 15% (9/59) used a mobile app, 8% (5/59) used web-enabled videoconferencing, and 3% (2/59) used other tools (eg, electronic medical record, healthnavigator.com website) to communicate electronically with their clients. More than half were very interested in using eHealth communication tools in the future for sharing appointment reminders (67%, 38/59) and general health tips (61%, 34/59) with their clients. Half were very interested in using eHealth communication tools in the future to share HIV medication reminders with their clients (50%, 29/59). Forty percent (23/59) were very interested in using eHealth communication tools to share vaccination reminders with their clients. CONCLUSIONS:Community-based HIV/AIDS service organization staff had some level of confidence that safeguards were in place to keep electronically shared information from being seen by other people. This is critically important given the sensitivity of the information shared between community-based HIV/AIDS service organization staff and their clients, and because many staff were very interested in using eHealth communication tools with their clients in the future. It is very likely that eHealth communication tools can be used in community settings to improve health outcomes across the HIV care continuum; in the interim, more research is needed to better understand factors that may facilitate or impede community-based HIV/AIDS service organization staff use and client acceptability.

SUBMITTER: Wigfall LT

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7511854 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

eHealth Communication With Clients at Community-Based HIV/AIDS Service Organizations in the Southern United States: Cross-Sectional Survey.

Wigfall Lisa Tisdale LT

JMIR formative research 20200909 9

<h4>Background</h4>Providing HIV/STD testing and prevention education, medical and nonmedical case management, housing assistance, transportation services, and patient navigation are just a few examples of how community-based HIV/AIDS service organizations will help the United States realize the goals of the updated National HIV/AIDS Strategy.<h4>Objective</h4>In this study, the aim was to assess electronic data security confidence level, electronic communication behaviors, and interest in using ...[more]

PMID: 32902395

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundMany clinical trials conducted by academic organizations are not published, or are not published completely. Following the US Food and Drug Administration Amendments Act of 2007, "The Final Rule" (compliance date April 18, 2017) and a National Institutes of Health policy clarified and expanded trial registration and results reporting requirements. We sought to identify policies, procedures, and resources to support trial registration and reporting at academic organizations.MethodsWe conducted an online survey from November 21, 2016 to March 1, 2017, before organizations were expected to comply with The Final Rule. We included active Protocol Registration and Results System (PRS) accounts classified by ClinicalTrials.gov as a "University/Organization" in the USA. PRS administrators manage information on ClinicalTrials.gov. We invited one PRS administrator to complete the survey for each organization account, which was the unit of analysis.ResultsEligible organization accounts (N = 783) included 47,701 records (e.g., studies) in August 2016. Participating organizations (366/783; 47%) included 40,351/47,701 (85%) records. Compared with other organizations, Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) holders, cancer centers, and large organizations were more likely to participate. A minority of accounts have a registration (156/366; 43%) or results reporting policy (129/366; 35%). Of those with policies, 15/156 (11%) and 49/156 (35%) reported that trials must be registered before institutional review board approval is granted or before beginning enrollment, respectively. Few organizations use computer software to monitor compliance (68/366; 19%). One organization had penalized an investigator for non-compliance. Among the 287/366 (78%) accounts reporting that they allocate staff to fulfill ClinicalTrials.gov registration and reporting requirements, the median number of full-time equivalent staff is 0.08 (interquartile range = 0.02-0.25). Because of non-response and social desirability, this could be a "best case" scenario.ConclusionsBefore the compliance date for The Final Rule, some academic organizations had policies and resources that facilitate clinical trial registration and reporting. Most organizations appear to be unprepared to meet the new requirements. Organizations could enact the following: adopt policies that require trial registration and reporting, allocate resources (e.g., staff, software) to support registration and reporting, and ensure there are consequences for investigators who do not follow standards for clinical research.

Project description:BACKGROUND:To support the use of research evidence by community-based organizations (CBOs) we have developed 'Synthesized HIV/AIDS Research Evidence' (SHARE), which is an evidence service for those working in the HIV sector. SHARE consists of several components: an online searchable database of HIV-relevant systematic reviews (retrievable based on a taxonomy of topics related to HIV/AIDS and open text search); periodic email updates; access to user-friendly summaries; and peer relevance assessments. Our objective is to evaluate whether this 'full serve' evidence service increases the use of research evidence by CBOs as compared to a 'self-serve' evidence service. METHODS/DESIGN:We will conduct a two-arm randomized controlled trial (RCT), along with a follow-up qualitative process study to explore the findings in greater depth. All CBOs affiliated with Canadian AIDS Society (n = 120) will be invited to participate and will be randomized to receive either the 'full-serve' version of SHARE or the 'self-serve' version (a listing of relevant systematic reviews with links to records on PubMed and worksheets that help CBOs find and use research evidence) using a simple randomized design. All management and staff from each organization will be provided access to the version of SHARE that their organization is allocated to. The trial duration will be 10 months (two-month baseline period, six-month intervention period, and two month crossover period), the primary outcome measure will be the mean number of logins/month/organization (averaged across the number of users from each organization) between baseline and the end of the intervention period. The secondary outcome will be intention to use research evidence as measured by a survey administered to one key decision maker from each organization. For the qualitative study, one key organizational decision maker from 15 organizations in each trial arm (n = 30) will be purposively sampled. One-on-one semi-structured interviews will be conducted by telephone on their views about and their experiences with the evidence service they received, how helpful it was in their work, why it was helpful (or not helpful), what aspects were most and least helpful and why, and recommendations for next steps. DISCUSSION:To our knowledge, this will be the first RCT to evaluate the effects of an evidence service specifically designed to support CBOs in finding and using research evidence. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01257724.

Project description:Outpatient human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) health care facilities receive funding from the Ryan White HIV/AIDS Program (RWHAP) to provide medical care and essential support services that help patients remain in care and adhere to treatment. Increased access to Medicaid and private insurance for HIV-infected persons may provide coverage for medical care but not all needed support services and may not supplant the need for RWHAP funding.To examine differences between RWHAP-funded and non-RWHAP-funded facilities and in patient outcomes between the 2 systems.The study was conducted from June 1, 2009, to May 31, 2012, using data from the 2009 and 2011 cycles of the Medical Monitoring Project, a national probability sample of 8038 HIV-infected adults receiving medical care at 989 outpatient health care facilities providing HIV medical care.Data were used to compare patient characteristics, service needs, and access to services at RWHAP-funded vs non-RWHAP-funded facilities. Differences in prescribed antiretroviral treatment and viral suppression were assessed. Data analysis was performed between February 2012 and June 2015.Overall, 34.4% of facilities received RWHAP funding and 72.8% of patients received care at RWHAP-funded facilities. With results reported as percentage (95% CI), patients attending RWHAP-funded facilities were more likely to be aged 18 to 29 years (8.5% [7.4%-9.5%] vs 5.0% [3.9%-6.2%]), female (29.2% [27.2%-31.2%] vs 20.1% [17.0%-23.1%]), black (47.5% [41.5%-53.5%] vs 25.8% [20.6%-31.0%]) or Hispanic (22.5% [16.4%-28.6%] vs 12.9% [10.6%-15.2%]), have less than a high school education (26.1% [24.0%-28.3%] vs 10.9% [8.7%-13.1%]), income at or below the poverty level (53.6% [50.3%-56.9%] vs 23.9% [19.7%-28.0%]), and lack health care coverage (25.0% [21.9%-28.1%] vs 6.1% [4.1%-8.0%]). The RWHAP-funded facilities were more likely to provide case management (76.1% [69.9%-82.2%] vs 15.4% [10.4%-20.4%]) as well as mental health (64.0% [57.0%-71.0%] vs 18.0% [14.0%-21.9%]), substance abuse (33.6% [27.0%-40.2%] vs 12.0% [8.0%-16.0%]), and other support services; patients attending RWHAP-funded facilities were more likely to receive these services. After adjusting for patient characteristics, the percentage prescribed ART antiretroviral therapy, reported as adjusted prevalence ratio (95% CI), was similar between RWHAP-funded and non-RWHAP-funded facilities (1.01 [0.99-1.03]), but among poor patients, those attending RWHAP-funded facilities were more likely to be virally suppressed (1.09 [1.02-1.16]).A total of 72.8% of HIV-positive patients received care at RWHAP-funded facilities. Many had multiple social determinants of poor health and used services at RWHAP-funded facilities associated with improved outcomes. Without facilities supported by the RWHAP, these patients may have had reduced access to services elsewhere. Poor patients were more likely to achieve viral suppression if they received care at a RWHAP-funded facility.

Dataset Information

EHealth Communication With Clients at Community-Based HIV/AIDS Service Organizations in the Southern United States: Cross-Sectional Survey.

Publications

eHealth Communication With Clients at Community-Based HIV/AIDS Service Organizations in the Southern United States: Cross-Sectional Survey.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets