Dataset Information

Development of a Clinic Screening Tool to Identify Burdensome Health-Related Issues Affecting People Living With HIV in Spain.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Numerous health-related issues continue to undermine the health and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of people living with HIV (PLHIV). We developed a clinic screening tool (CST-HIV) for the purpose of identifying these issues in routine specialist clinical care in Spain.

Methods

We used the following established instrument development procedures: (1) a literature review; (2) four focus group discussions (FGDs), two that convened 16 expert HIV care providers, and two that convened 15 PLHIV; (3) prioritisation, selection and definition of constructs (health-related issues) to include in the CST-HIV and drafting of initial item pool; and (4) a pilot study to analyse psychometric properties and validity of items and to determine which to retain in the final CST-HIV. The FGD interview scripts incorporated an exercise to prioritise the health-related issues perceived to have the greatest negative effect on HRQoL. The online questionnaire used for the pilot study included the pool of CST-HIV items and validated measures of each construct.

Results

We identified 68 articles that reported on factors associated with the HRQoL of PLHIV. The most burdensome health-related issues identified in the FGDs related to stigma, socioeconomic vulnerability, sleep/fatigue, pain, body changes, emotional distress, and sexuality. Based on the literature review and FGD findings, we selected and defined the following constructs to include in the initial CST-HIV: anticipated stigma, emotional distress, sexuality, social support, material deprivation, sleep/fatigue, cognitive problems, and physical symptoms. Two researchers wrote six to eight items for each construct. Next, 18 experts rated 47 items based on their clarity, relevance, and representativeness. Pilot testing was carried out with 226 PLHIV in Spain. We retained 24 items based on empirical criteria that showed adequate psychometric properties. Confirmatory factor analysis confirmed the eight-factor structure with a good fit to the data (RMSEA = 0.035, AGFI = 0.97, CFI = 0.99). We found strong positive correlations between the instrument's eight dimensions and validated measures of the same constructs. Likewise, we found negative associations between the dimensions of the CST-HIV and HRQoL.

Conclusion

The CST-HIV is a promising tool for use in routine clinical care to efficiently identify and address health-related issues undermining the HRQoL of PLHIV.

SUBMITTER: Fuster-RuizdeApodaca MJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8219862 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionA simple cost-effective strategy to pre-screen for targeted HIV testing can have substantial benefit in high burden and resource limited settings. A 4-item (previous hospitalisation, orphanhood, poor health status, and recurring skin problems) screening tool to identify adolescents living with HIV has previously shown high sensitivity in healthcare facility settings. We validated this screening tool in a community setting, in Harare, Zimbabwe in a community-based HIV prevalence survey.MethodsA community-based HIV prevalence survey was conducted among individuals aged 8-17 years with guardian consent and child assent and residing in 7 communities during the period February 2015 to December 2015. Participants without previously diagnosed HIV were evaluated for the probability of having HIV using the screening tool. HIV status was defined using an anonymous HIV test which was done using Oral Mucosal Transudate (OMT). A questionnaire was also administered to ascertain self-reported HIV status and screening tool items. The validity of a 4-item screening tool was tested. Sensitivity and specificity of the screening tool was assessed against the HIV status based on OMT result.ResultsPrevalence survey participants were 5386 children who had an HIV test result, aged 8-17 years. However, 5384, who did not report testing HIV positive and responded to all screening tool item questions were included in the validation. Their median age was 12 (IQR: 10-15) years, 2515 (46.7%) were male. HIV prevalence was 1.3% (95% CI:1.0-1.8%). The 4-item screening tool had poor accuracy with an area under the receiver operating curve of 0.65(95% CI: 0.60-0.72) at a cut-off score≥1. Its sensitivity was 56.3% (95% CI:44.0-68.1%) and specificity of 75.1% (95% CI:73.9-76.3%), PPV of 2.9% (95% CI:2.1-3.9%) and a NPV of 99.2% (95% CI:98.9-99.5%). The number needed to test to diagnose one child using the screening tool was 55% lower than universal testing for HIV.ConclusionUse of the 4-item screening tool could be a strategy that can be adopted to identify children living with HIV in a community setting in resource limited settings by reducing the number needed to test compared to universal testing since it is inexpensive, easy to administer and not harmful. However, screening items adapted to a community setting need to be explored to improve the performance of the screening tool.

Project description:Background and objectivePrescribing cascades occur when a drug is prescribed to manage side effects of another drug, typically when a side effect is misinterpreted as a new condition. A consensus list of clinically important prescribing cascades that adversely affect older persons' health (i.e., where risks of the prescribing cascade usually exceed benefits) was developed to help identify, prevent, and manage prescribing cascades.MethodsThree rounds of a modified Delphi process were conducted with a multidisciplinary panel of 38 clinicians from six countries with expertise in geriatric pharmacotherapy. The clinical importance of 139 prescribing cascades was assessed in Round 1. Cascades highly rated by ≥ 70% of panelists were included in subsequent rounds. Factors influencing ratings in Rounds 1 and 3 were categorized. After three Delphi rounds, highly rated prescribing cascades were reviewed by the study team to determine the final list of clinically important cascades consistent with potentially inappropriate prescribing.ResultsAfter three rounds, 13 prescribing cascades were highly rated by panelists. Following a study team review, the final tool includes nine clinically important prescribing cascades consistent with potentially inappropriate prescribing. Panelists reported that their ratings were influenced by many factors (e.g., how commonly they encountered the medications involved and the cascade itself, the severity of side effects, availability of alternatives). The relative importance of these factors in determining clinical importance varied by panelist.ConclusionsA nine-item consensus-based list of clinically important prescribing cascades, representing potentially inappropriate prescribing, was developed. Panelists' decisions about what constituted a clinically important prescribing cascade were multi-factorial. This tool not only raises awareness about these cascades but will also help clinicians recognize these and other important prescribing cascades. This list contributes to the prevention and management of polypharmacy and medication-related harm in older people.

Project description:BackgroundIndividual case safety reports of suspected harm from medicines are fundamental to post-marketing surveillance. Their value is directly proportional to the amount of clinically relevant information they include. To improve the quality of the data, communication between stakeholders is essential and can be facilitated by a simple score and visualisation of the results.ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to propose a measure of completeness and identify predictors of well-documented reports, globally.MethodsThe Uppsala Monitoring Centre has developed the vigiGrade completeness score to measure the amount of clinically relevant information in structured format, without reflecting whether the information establishes causality between the drug and adverse event. The vigiGrade completeness score (C) starts at 1 for reports with information on time-to-onset, age, sex, indication, outcome, report type, dose, country, primary reporter and comments. For each missing dimension, a penalty is detracted which varies with clinical relevance. We classified reports with C > 0.8 as well-documented and identified all such reports in the WHO global individual case safety report database, VigiBase, from 2007 to January 2012. We utilised odds ratios with statistical shrinkage to identify subgroups with unexpectedly high proportions of well-documented reports.ResultsAltogether, 430,000 (13 %) of the studied reports achieved C > 0.8 in VigiBase. For VigiBase as a whole, the median completeness was 0.41 with an interquartile range of 0.26-0.63. Two out of three well-documented reports come from Europe, and two out of three from physicians. Among the countries with more than 1,000 reports in total, the highest rate of well-documented reports is 65 % in Italy. Tunisia, Spain, Portugal, Croatia and Denmark each have rates above 50 %, and another 20 countries have rates above 30 %. On the whole, 24 % of the reports from physicians are well-documented compared with only 4 % for consumers/non-health professionals. Notably, Denmark and Norway have more than 50 % well-documented reports from consumers/non-health professionals and higher rates than for physicians. The rate of well-documented reports for the E2B format is 11 % compared with 22 % for the older INTDIS (International Drug Information System) format. However, for E2B reports entered via the WHO programme's e-reporting system VigiFlow, the rate is 29 %.ConclusionOverall, only one report in eight provides the desired level of information, but much higher proportions are observed for individual countries. Physicians and e-reporting tools also generate greater proportions of well-documented reports overall. Reports from consumers/non-health professionals in specific regions have excellent quality, which illustrates their potential for the future. vigiGrade has already provided valuable information by highlighting data quality issues both in Italy and the USA.

Project description:BackgroundHospitalization is often stressful and burdensome for people living with dementia (PwD) and their informal caregivers (ICs). Day clinic treatment may provide a suitable alternative, but is often precluded by a diagnosis of dementia. Furthermore, it is often caregiver-based ratings that measure treatment success as the validity of self-reports in PwD is critically discussed. We therefore set out to examine the feasibility of psychobiological stress measures in PwD and ICs and to evaluate treatment trajectories considering both the day clinic context and the daily life of the dyads.MethodA total of 40 dyads of PwD (mean age: 78.15 ± 6.80) and their ICs (mean age: 63.85 ± 13.09) completed paper-and-pencil questionnaires (covering stress, depressive symptoms, and caregiver burden among others) in addition to the measurement of hair cortisol concentrations (HCC) at admission, discharge, and follow-up 6 months after day clinic treatment. As part of an ambulatory assessment, for 2 days at the beginning and 2 days at the end of the day clinic treatment, PwD and ICs collected six saliva samples per day for the analysis of salivary cortisol (sCort) and alpha-amylase (sAA).ResultsPaper-and-pencil questionnaires and HCC assessments were more feasible than the ambulatory assessment. We found discrepancies between subjective and physiological markers of stress in PwD. Whereas HCC decreased over time, self-reported stress increased. Child-parent dyads reported decreases in neuropsychiatric symptoms, associated burden, and self-reported stress from admission to follow-up. In daily life, both PwD and ICs showed characteristic diurnal profiles of sAA and sCort, however, we found no differences in summary indicators of salivary stress markers over time.DiscussionThe psychobiological evaluation was feasible and added informative value, underlining the potential of physiological stress markers to complement self-reports on stress in PwD and to objectively evaluate treatment trajectories. In this sample, HCC was more feasible and acceptable as biological marker of stress compared to saliva samples. Concerning treatment trajectories, differential effects on the dyads were found, with child-parent dyads benefiting more from day clinic treatment compared to spousal dyads.

Project description:BackgroundMental illness stigma refers to damaging stereotypes and emotional responses around the experience of mental health issues. Media-based interventions have the potential to reduce the public's stigmatizing attitudes by improving mental health literacy, emotional appeal, and the intimacy of address. As audio-based media facilitating storytelling, podcasts show potential for reducing stigma; however, it is unclear what features could make a podcast effective or engaging.ObjectiveThe Co-Design and Anti-Stigma Podcast Research (CASPR) study aimed to collaborate with key target audience members to inform the development of a new podcast. This podcast primarily aims to reduce listeners' stigmatizing attitudes toward people living with complex mental health issues.MethodsThis study was adapted from Experience-Based Co-Design methodology. The first part, information gathering, involved a web-based mixed methods survey with 629 Australian podcast listeners to explore their interest and concerns around podcasts. Then, a series of focus groups were held with a purposive sample of 25 participants to explore the potential benefits and challenges of the podcast format. Focus group participants included people with lived experience of complex mental health issues, media and communications professionals, health care professionals, and people interested in workplace mental health. The second part, co-design, constituted 3 meetings of a co-design committee with 10 participants drawn from the focus groups to design the podcast using brainstorming and decision-making activities.ResultsMost survey respondents (537/629, 85.3%) indicated a willingness to listen to a podcast about experiences of mental illness stigma; participants indicated preference for semistructured episodes and a mixture of light and serious content. Focus group participants identified potential challenges with appealing to listeners, making the content emotionally resonant and engaging, and translation to listeners' attitude change. The co-design committee collaborated to achieve consensus on the focus of individual episodes: domains where stigma and discrimination are common, such as workplaces and health care settings; the structure of individual episodes: storyboards that centralize guests with lived experience, featuring explicit discussions around stigma and discrimination; and overarching content principles, including a sincere, empathetic, and hopeful tone; using plain language; having clear calls to action; and providing listener resources.ConclusionsThe co-design process informed a podcast design that features lived experience narratives with an explicit focus on stigma and discrimination, highlighting the realities of stigma while acknowledging progress in the space and how listeners can contribute toward social change. This study allowed for an in-depth discussion around the strengths and limitations of such a podcast according to different target audience members. The co-design committee designed key elements of a podcast that has the potential to minimize the limitations of the format while embracing the benefits of podcast-based storytelling. Once produced, the podcast will be evaluated for its impact on attitude change.