Dataset Information

Process evaluation of PrEP implementation in Kenya: adaptation of practices and contextual modifications in public HIV care clinics.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

In Africa, oral pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is largely provided via over-burdened public HIV care clinics. Successfully incorporating PrEP services into these clinics may require adaptations to practices outlined in national implementation guidelines and modifications to routine existing service delivery. We aimed to describe adaptations made by public HIV clinics in Kenya to integrate PrEP delivery into existing services.

Methods

The Partners Scale-Up Project aimed to catalyse integration of PrEP in 25 public HIV care clinics. Between May and December 2018, we conducted qualitative interviews with health providers and documented clinic observations in technical assistance (TA) reports to understand the process of PrEP service integration. We analysed 36 health provider interview transcripts and 25 TA reports to identify clinic-level adaptations to activities outlined in Kenyan Ministry of Health PrEP guidelines and modifications made to existing service delivery practices to successfully incorporate PrEP services. Identified adaptations were reported using the expanded framework for reporting adaptations and modifications (FRAME).

Results

All clinics (n = 25) performed HIV testing, HIV risk assessment, PrEP education and adherence counselling as stipulated in the guidelines. Most clinics initiated clients on PrEP without creatinine testing if otherwise healthy. While monthly refill appointments are recommended, a majority of clinics issued PrEP users two to three months of pills at a time. Clinics also implemented practices that had not been specified in the guidelines including incorporating PrEP-related topics into routine health talks, calling clients with missed PrEP appointments, discussing PrEP service delivery in regular staff meetings, 'fast-tracking' PrEP clients and dispensing PrEP in clinic rooms rather than at clinic-based pharmacies. PrEP initiation numbers were highest among clinics that did not require creatinine testing, conducted peer on-the-job PrEP training and those that discussed PrEP delivery in their routine meetings. Above-average continuation was observed among clinics that discussed PrEP in their routine meetings, dispensed PrEP in clinic rooms and offered PrEP at nonregular hours.

Conclusions

Health providers in public HIV care clinics instituted practices and made innovative adaptations to PrEP delivery to reduce barriers for clients and staff. Encouraging clinic level adaptations to national implementation guidelines will facilitate scale-up of PrEP delivery.

SUBMITTER: Irungu EM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8425783 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Tailored delivery strategies are important for optimizing the benefit and overall reach of PrEP in sub-Saharan Africa. An integrated approach of delivering time-limited PrEP in combination with ART to serodifferent couples encourages PrEP use in the HIV-negative partner as a bridge to sustained ART use. Although PrEP has been delivered in ART clinics for many years, the processes involved in integrating PrEP into ART services are not well understood. The Partners PrEP Program was a stepped-wedge cluster randomized trial of integrated PrEP and ART delivery for HIV serodifferent couples in 12 public health facilities in central Uganda (Clinicaltrials.gov NCT03586128). Using qualitative data, we identified and characterized key implementation processes that explain how PrEP delivery was integrated into existing ART services in the Partners PrEP Program. In-depth interviews were conducted with a purposefully-selected sub-sample of 83 members of 42 participating serodifferent couples, and with 36 health care providers implementing integrated delivery. High quality training, technical supervision, and teamwork were identified as key processes supporting providers to implement PrEP delivery. Interest in the PrEP program was promoted through the numerous ways health care providers made integrated ART and PrEP meaningful for serodifferent couples, including tailored counseling messages, efforts to build confidence in integrated delivery, and strategies to create demand for PrEP. Couples in the qualitative sample responded positively to providers' efforts to promote the integrated strategy. HIV-negative partners initiated PrEP to preserve their relationships, which inspired their partners living with HIV to recommit to ART adherence. Lack of disclosure among couples and poor retention on PrEP were identified as barriers to implementation of the PrEP program. A greater emphasis on understanding the meaning of PrEP for users and its contribution to implementation promises to strengthen future research on PrEP scale up in sub-Saharan Africa.

Project description:INTRODUCTION:Partner notification services (PNS) increase the HIV status knowledge and linkage to care and treatment. However, it is unclear if PNS can facilitate linkage of HIV-negative partners to prevention services such as pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP). Using qualitative methods, we explored provider perspective regarding the interaction of PrEP availability, PNS and antiretroviral treatment (ART) outcomes within a project integrating PrEP services into HIV care clinics in eight counties in western and central Kenya. METHODS:From May 2017 to August 2018, data on integrated PrEP service delivery including its interaction with PNS were collected through 71 key informant in-depth interviews with healthcare providers and 24 standardized technical assistance reports summarizing implementation at the participating clinics. Thus, the perspective was from that of providers; analyses focused on emergent themes relating PNS to PrEP and ART services. RESULTS:Providers found that PrEP integration provided an additional concrete prevention option for HIV-negative partners and created a motivation to offer PNS to persons living with HIV. PrEP availability also seemed to operate as an incentive for those living with HIV to participate in PNS, which in turn enhanced identification of potential PrEP clients and created an environment for discussing HIV transmission risk. Providers commented that initiating HIV-negative partners on PrEP enhanced mutual monitoring of health outcomes, including improved adherence to ART by partners living with HIV. Clinics noted prioritizing people living with HIV with detectable viral loads for PNS in order to identify HIV-negative partners who would benefit most from PrEP. Providers felt motivated by the apparent synergistic interaction of PNS, PrEP and ART. CONCLUSIONS:Providers felt that the integration of PrEP into HIV care clinics stimulated the provision of PNS, and PNS was used to improve the identification of potential PrEP clients. The integrated combination of PNS, PrEP and ART is synergistic and should be promoted in HIV clinics.

Project description:Adolescent girls and young women account for a disproportionate fraction of new HIV infections in Africa and are a priority population for HIV prevention, including provision of pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP). Anchoring PrEP delivery to care settings like family planning (FP) services that women already access routinely may offer an efficient platform to reach HIV at-risk women. However, context-specific implementation science evaluation is needed. The Family Planning Plus Project is a prospective, pragmatic implementation evaluation, designed as a stepped wedge, cluster randomized trial, at 12 clinics in Kenya. In collaboration with the Kenya Ministry of Health and Kisumu County Department of Health, we will introduce integration of HIV risk screening and PrEP delivery in public health FP clinics. The core multifaceted implementation strategies to integrate PrEP in FP clinics will include: (1) PrEP delivery by existing FP clinic staff, (2) health provider training, (3) PrEP technical assistance to coach and mentor providers, (4) joint supervision with Kisumu County health officials, and (5) stakeholder engagement. All core components of PrEP delivery-including screening for HIV risk, HIV testing, dispensing, adherence and risk reduction counseling, assessment of side effects, and provision of refills, or safety assessment-will be conducted by existing FP clinic staff as part of a standard care service package. The goal is to catalyze sustainable scale-up within existing infrastructures beyond the project. We will rigorously evaluate implementation outcomes and impact, using the RE-AIM (Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, Maintenance) framework, and we will use Organizational Readiness for Implementing Change (ORIC) and the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Science Research (CFIR) to assess readiness to implement and contextual enablers and barriers of implementation, including how clinics innovate efficient delivery systems. Anchoring PrEP delivery to existing FP systems and staffing has tremendous potential to address barriers that women face in accessing HIV prevention and PrEP care, including lack of time, cost, and stigma of visiting a facility solely for HIV prevention. The FP Plus Project will initiate preparation for full-scale and sustainable model of integration of comprehensive HIV prevention services, including PrEP implementation, in public health FP clinics in low-income settings. Trial registration Registered with ClinicalTrials.gov on December 14, 2020: NCT04666792.

Project description:BackgroundPre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is recommended by the World Health Organization and the Kenyan Ministry of Health for HIV prevention in pregnancy and postpartum for women at risk for HIV. Integration of PrEP into antenatal care is promising, but delivery gaps exist in the face of healthcare provider shortages in resource-limited settings.MethodsBetween May and November 2021, we conducted a difference-in-differences study (3 months pre-intervention data collection and 3 months post-intervention data collection) analyzing four intervention facilities, where the strategies were implemented, and four comparison facilities, where no strategies were implemented. We tested a combination of three implementation strategies-video-based PrEP information in the waiting bay, HIV self-testing, and dispensing of PrEP in the antenatal care rooms-to improve PrEP delivery. We compared absolute changes in the proportion of antenatal attendees screened for PrEP (PrEP penetration), the proportion receiving all PrEP-specific steps in a visit (HIV testing, risk screening, and PrEP counseling) (PrEP fidelity), and client PrEP knowledge, client satisfaction, and waiting time and service time (a priori outcomes); post hoc, we compared the proportion offered PrEP (PrEP offer) and completing HIV testing. We measured provider perceptions of the acceptability and appropriateness of the implementation strategies.ResultsWe observed significant improvements in PrEP penetration, PrEP offer, satisfaction, and knowledge (p < 0.05) and improvements in fidelity that trended towards significance (p = 0.057). PrEP penetration increased 5 percentage points (p = 0.008), PrEP fidelity increased 8 percentage points (p = 0.057), and PrEP offer increased 4 percentage points (p = 0.003) in intervention vs. comparison facilities. Client PrEP knowledge increased by 1.7 out of 6 total points (p < 0.001) and client satisfaction increased by 0.7 out of 24 total points (p = 0.003) in intervention vs. comparison facilities. We observed no changes in service time (0.09-min decrease; p = 0.435) and a small increase in waiting time (0.33-min increase; p = 0.005). HIV testing among those eligible did not change (1.5 percentage point decrease, p = 0.800). Providers felt the implementation strategies were acceptable and appropriate (median acceptability: 20/20; median appropriateness: 19.5/20). However, absolute levels of each step of the PrEP cascade remained suboptimal.ConclusionsAn implementation strategy package with video information, HIV self-testing, and co-location of medication dispensing enhanced PrEP delivery across several implementation outcomes and client satisfaction, while not substantially increasing wait time or decreasing provider-client contact time.Clinical trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov , identifier, NCT04712994.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Antiretroviral therapy (ART) for HIV-infected persons and pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) for uninfected persons are extraordinarily effective strategies for HIV prevention. In Africa, the region which shoulders the highest HIV burden, HIV care is principally delivered through public health HIV care clinics, offering an existing platform to incorporate PrEP delivery and maximize ART and PrEP synergies. However, successfully bringing this integrated approach to scale requires an implementation science evaluation in public health settings. METHODS:The Partners Scale Up Project is a prospective, pragmatic implementation evaluation, designed as a stepped-wedge, cluster-randomized trial, operating at 24 clinics in Kenya. In collaboration with the Kenya Ministry of Health, we are catalyzing scaled implementation of PrEP delivery integrated in HIV care clinics. The intervention package includes staff training, clinic streamlined access to PrEP commodity from the Kenya Medical Supply Authority, and ongoing intensive technical assistance to rigorously assess how PrEP delivery is implemented. PrEP service delivery including retention efforts are conducted by the clinic staff with no additional resources from the project. Guided by the RE-AIM (Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, Maintenance) framework and Consolidated Framework for Implementation Science Research, project progress and learning are documented through ongoing monitoring and process evaluations, including chart abstraction and individual and key informant interviews, to evaluate pragmatic rollout and understand barriers and facilitators for successful PrEP delivery in this setting. In this staged rollout design, each step provides data for both pre-implementation (baseline) and implementation periods, and we will compare time points across steps in the baseline versus implementation periods. DISCUSSION:Cost-effective delivery models are urgently needed to maximize the public health impact of PrEP and ART. The Partners Scale Up Project will set the stage for full-scale PrEP implementation fully run and owned by the Kenya Ministry of Health. The work combines nationally sponsored PrEP delivery with technical support and implementation science from academic partners, defining a new but sustainable paradigm for public health collaboration. TRIAL REGISTRATION:Registered with ClinicalTrials.gov on February 14, 2017: NCT03052010 .

Project description:BackgroundIn 2016, the Kenyan Ministry of Health (MOH) released guidelines that recommend preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) for persons with substantial ongoing HIV risk, including those in HIV serodiscordant partnerships. Estimates of the costs of delivering PrEP within Kenyan public health facilities are needed for planning for PrEP scale up.MethodsWe estimated the incremental annual costs of providing PrEP to HIV uninfected partners as a time-limited "bridge" until the infected partner is virally suppressed on ART within HIV serodiscordant couples as part of routine clinic care in Thika, Kenya. Costs were collected from the Partners Demonstration Project, a prospective evaluation of integrated delivery of preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) and antiretroviral therapy (ART) to high-risk HIV serodiscordant couples. We conducted time and motion studies to distinguish between activities related to research, routine clinical care, and PrEP delivery. Costs (2015 US dollars) were collected from the MOH perspective and divided into staff, transportation, equipment, supplies, buildings and overhead, and start-up.ResultsPrEP related activities conducted during the screening, enrollment, and follow-up visits took an average of 13 minutes, 51 minutes, and 12 minutes, respectively. Assuming a staff structure of 3 counselors, 1 nurse, and 2 clinicians, we estimate that 3,178 couples can be screened, 1,444 couples offered PrEP and ART, and 6,138 couples followed up annually in an average HIV care clinic. Using costs incurred by the MOH for personnel, drug, and laboratory tests, we estimate that the incremental cost of offering PrEP to HIV uninfected partners within existing ART programs is $86.79 per couple per year. Personnel and PrEP medication made up the largest portion of the costs. We estimate that the total cost to Ministry of Health of delivering integrated PrEP and ART program in public health facilities is $250.19 per HIV serodiscordant couple per year.ConclusionsTime-limited provision of PrEP to the HIV uninfected partner within HIV serodiscordant couples can be an affordable delivery model implemented in HIV care programs in Kenya and similar settings. These costs can be used for budgetary planning and cost effectiveness analyses.

Project description:INTRODUCTION:The World Health Organization, while recommending pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) for HIV-negative pregnant and postpartum women in HIV high-burden settings, advocates for continued safety evaluation of PrEP in this population. METHODS:The PrEP Implementation in Young Women and Adolescents (PrIYA) program delivered PrEP to pregnant and postpartum women integrated within routine maternal and child health clinics (MCH) at 16 sites in Western Kenya. PrEP exposure and perinatal outcome data were collected among women obtaining postnatal services during programme evaluation. PrEP use was self-reported and confirmed with clinical records. Perinatal outcomes including gestational age at birth, birthweight, congenital malformations and infant growth outcomes were abstracted from clinical records for mother-infant pairs attending the six week visit. Associations between infant outcomes and maternal prenatal PrEP use were assessed using univariate and multivariate logistic and linear regression. RESULTS:The PrIYA evaluation identified 1530 postpartum mother-infant pairs with data on prenatal PrEP exposure: 206 with prenatal PrEP use, 1324 without. Median maternal age was 24 years in both groups. PrEP users (any reported PrEP use) were significantly more likely to report HIV risk factors such as: intimate partner violence, sexually transmitted infections and having a partner with positive or unknown HIV status. Most mothers initiated PrEP during the second trimester (n = 116, 57%) and used PrEP for more than one month (n = 110, 58%). The mean birthweight was 3.3 kg and gestational age at birth was 38.5 weeks in both groups. There were no major differences between PrEP exposed and unexposed infants in rates of preterm birth and low birthweight. There were no congenital malformations identified in the PrEP-exposed group and five reported in the PrEP unexposed group. At six weeks postpartum, infants in both groups had similar growth. No differences in infant outcomes were found by duration PrEP exposure, trimester of PrEP initiation, a subset analysis of women 15 to 24 years old or in multivariate analyses. This analysis demonstrates that monitoring of infant outcomes is feasible within large-scale programmatic implementation of PrEP among pregnant and postpartum populations. CONCLUSIONS:Pregnancy outcomes and early infant growth did not differ by PrEP exposure.

Project description:BackgroundAs pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) scales up in sub-Saharan Africa, governments and implementers need to understand how to best manage national programs. Kenya's national PrEP program offers an opportunity to review elements of program success within the health system and evaluate the utility of a national implementation framework. We explored health system considerations for PrEP implementation to understand how Kenya's national PrEP implementation priorities align with those of PrEP service providers, peer educators, and program or county managers.MethodsWe conducted twelve key informant interviews (KII) and nine focus group discussions (FGDs) with PrEP program and county managers (n = 12), peer educators (n = 44), and PrEP service providers (n = 48). We recruited participants across a variety of cadres and experiences with PrEP programs. KIIs and FGDs focused on PrEP service delivery and program implementation. Data were collected by trained study staff, audio recorded, translated into English, and transcribed. We used framework analysis methods to systematically apply Kenya's 2017 National PrEP Implementation Framework to the data and summarized findings according to the seven Implementation Framework domains.ResultsAll respondents emphasized the important role of communication, coordination, training, and leadership in PrEP implementation. PrEP service providers and program and county managers highlighted the importance of efficient data collection and utilization, and improved resource allocation. Commodity security and research, while key elements of the PrEP Implementation Framework, were less commonly discussed, and research was less prioritized by respondents. Respondents highlighted the importance of coordinated PrEP service delivery across sites and programs to improve overall client experiences.ConclusionIn the context of a nationally-scaled PrEP program, PrEP service providers, peer educators, and program and county managers value strong leadership, close coordination of services across sites, and expedient use of data to improve strategies and services. Kenya's PrEP Implementation Framework aligns closely with the priorities of individuals involved in PrEP service delivery and management, and provides a comprehensive overview of health system considerations for effective implementation of a PrEP program at scale.

Project description:BackgroundTitle X-funded family planning clinics have been identified as optimal sites for delivery of pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) for HIV prevention to U.S. women. However, PrEP has not been widely integrated into family planning services, especially in the Southern U.S., and data suggest there may be significant implementation challenges in this setting.MethodsTo understand contextual factors that are key to successful PrEP implementation in family planning clinics, we conducted in-depth qualitative interviews with key informants from 38 family planning clinics (11 clinics prescribed PrEP and 27 did not). Interviews were guided by constructs from the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), and qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) was used to uncover the configurations of CFIR factors that led to PrEP implementation.ResultsWe identified 3 distinct construct configurations, or pathways, that led to successful PrEP implementation: (1) high "Leadership Engagement" AND high "Available Resources"; OR (2) high "Leadership Engagement" AND NOT located in the Southeast region; OR (3) high "Access to Knowledge and Information" AND NOT located in the Southeast region. Additionally, there were 2 solution paths that led to absence of PrEP implementation: (1) low "Access to Knowledge and Information" AND low "Leadership Engagement"; OR (2) low "Available Resources" AND high "External Partnerships".DiscussionWe identified the most salient combinations of co-occurring organizational barriers or facilitators associated with PrEP implementation across Title X clinics in the Southern U.S. We discuss implementation strategies to promote pathways that led to implementation success, as well as strategies to overcome pathways to implementation failure. Notably, we identified regional differences in the pathways that led to PrEP implementation, with Southeastern clinics facing the most obstacles to implementation, specifically substantial resource constraints. Identifying implementation pathways is an important first step for packaging multiple implementation strategies that could be employed by state-level Title X grantees to help scale up PrEP.

Project description:IntroductionIn public clinics in Kenya, separate, sequential delivery of the component services of pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) (e.g. HIV testing, counselling, and dispensing) creates long wait times that hinder clients' ability and desire to access and continue PrEP. We conducted a mixed methods study in four public clinics in western Kenya to identify strategies for operationalizing a one-stop shop (OSS) model and evaluate whether this model could improve client wait time and care acceptability among clients and providers without negatively impacting uptake or continuation.MethodsFrom January 2020 through November 2020, we collected and analysed 47 time-and-motion observations using Mann-Whitney U tests, 29 provider and client interviews, 68 technical assistance reports, and clinic flow maps from intervention clinics. We used controlled interrupted time series (cITS) to compare trends in PrEP initiation and on-time returns from a 12-month pre-intervention period (January-December 2019) to an 8-month post-period (January-November 2020, excluding a 3-month COVID-19 wash-out period) at intervention and control clinics.ResultsFrom the pre- to post-period, median client wait time at intervention clinics dropped significantly from 31 to 6 minutes (p = 0.02), while median provider contact time remained around 23 minutes (p = 0.4). Intervention clinics achieved efficiency gains by moving PrEP delivery to lower volume departments, moving steps closer together (e.g. relocating supplies; cross-training and task-shifting), and differentiating clients based on the subset of services needed. Clients and providers found the OSS model highly acceptable and additionally identified increased privacy, reduced stigma, and higher quality client-provider interactions as benefits of the model. From the pre- to post-period, average monthly initiations at intervention and control clinics increased by 6 and 2.3, respectively, and percent of expected follow-up visits occurring on time decreased by 18% and 26%, respectively; cITS analysis of PrEP initiations (n = 1227) and follow-up visits (n = 2696) revealed no significant difference between intervention and control clinics in terms of trends in PrEP initiation and on-time returns (all p>0.05).ConclusionsAn OSS model significantly improved client wait time and care acceptability without negatively impacting initiations or continuations, thus highlighting opportunities to improve the efficiency of PrEP delivery efficiency and client-centredness.