Browsing by Author "Le Tourneau N"

Now showing 1 - 4 of 4

Corrigendum to "Drivers of decision-making for future adult vaccines: a best-worst scaling among community members and health care workers in Zambia" [Vaccine 70 (2026) 128003].
(2026-Jun-03) Le Tourneau N; Sharma A; Pry JM; Haambokoma M; Shamoya B; Sikombe K; Simbeza SS; Zulu N; Geng EH; Eshun-Wilson I; Kerkhoff AD
Corrigendum to "Intention to receive new vaccines post-COVID-19 pandemic among adults and health workers in Lusaka, Zambia" ["Vaccine 50 (2025) 126846].
(2026-May-31) Sharma A; Kerkhoff AD; Haambokoma M; Shamoya B; Sikombe K; Simbeza SS; Zulu N; Geng EH; Eshun-Wilsonova I; Le Tourneau N; Pry JM
Identifying care gaps along the HIV treatment failure cascade: A multistate analysis of viral load monitoring, re-suppression, and regimen switches in Zambia.
(2025-Sep) Sikombe K; Le Tourneau N; Rice B; Pry JM; Simbeza S; Beres LK; Sharma A; Mukamba N; Wringe A; Hargreaves JR; Mutale J; Moore CB; Sikazwe I; Geng E; Mody A
BACKGROUND: Timely response to treatment failure is critical for improved outcomes and viral re-suppression among people living with HIV, but care gaps along the treatment failure cascade can occur due to delays by both clients (e.g., retention and adherence) and health systems (e.g., fidelity to viral load [VL] monitoring guidelines). We used multistate analysis to identify drivers of implementation gaps in the treatment failure cascade, including time to HIV VL monitoring, re-suppression, and regimen switches, in Zambia. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We used national electronic HIV health records to identify adults on antiretroviral therapy (ART) for more than 6 months who experienced treatment failure (VL ≥ 1,000 copies/ml) at 24 clinics in Lusaka, Zambia, between August 2019 and November 2021. Using multistate analyses, we examined how care evolved after treatment failure, accounting for transitions across the treatment failure cascade over time, such as return visits, repeat VL testing, treatment interruptions (>60 days late for visit), and viral re-suppression. Analyses were stratified by ART regimen at cohort entry: tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/lamivudine or emtricitabine/dolutegravir TDF/XTC/DTG (TLD) and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/lamivudine or emtricitabine/efavirenz TDF/XTC/EFV (TLE). We repeated analyses to assess switch to second-line therapy among those with consecutively unsuppressed VL test results who were due for regimen switch. Among 179,855 individuals on ART (143,857 with documented VL), 7,916 (4.4%) had a documented elevated VL and drug regimen at the time of treatment failure (52.3% female, median age was 36.7 years (IQR 29.9-43.6), median time on ART 3.3 years (IQR 1.7-6.6), 54.6% on TLD and 45.4% on TLE). Among those with treatment failure, 72.2% (CI 71.3, 73.0%) had returned to clinic 6 months after initial elevated VL was drawn. After one year, 70.1% (CI 69.3, 70.9%) had a repeat VL, 16.6% (CI 15.9, 17.2%) experienced treatment interruption, and 11.4% (CI 10.3, 12.4%) returned to care without repeat VL testing. Among those with a repeat VL, 85.0% (CI 83.9, 86.1%) on TLD and 58.2% (CI 56.8, 59.8%) on TLE had resuppressed. Among those due for second-line switch, 27.9% (CI 24.1, 31.5%) on TLD and 66.6% (CI 64.5, 68.9%) on TLE had changed regimens after one year while 52.4% on TLD had a third VL repeated prior to switch (CI 47.2, 57.4%) (68.0% CI 61.6, 75.2% suppressed of those with repeated VL) compared to 32.1% (CI 29.9, 34.1%) (40.7% CI 36.1, 45.4% suppressed) on TLE. This study was limited by the inability to capture all aspects of care delivery related to treatment failure, such as outreach, enhanced adherence counseling confirmation, and provider rationale for delayed VL rechecking. CONCLUSION: After treatment failure, we identified substantial delays in returning for adherence counseling, treatment interruptions, and missed opportunities in rechecking VL status or switching to second-line therapy in routine care in Zambia. Among those who did have VL tests rechecked, re-suppression rates were significantly higher among individuals on TLD compared to TLE. To optimize response and outcomes after treatment failure, strategies must prioritize and target both client and health systems behaviors to meet the care needs in the modern era of TLD.
Person-centred interventions to improve patient-provider relationships for HIV services in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review.
(2024-May) Beres LK; Underwood A; Le Tourneau N; Kemp CG; Kore G; Yaeger L; Li J; Aaron A; Keene C; Mallela DP; Khalifa BAA; Mody A; Schwartz SR; Baral S; Mwamba C; Sikombe K; Eshun-Wilson I; Geng EH; Lavoie MC
INTRODUCTION: Person-centred care (PCC) has been recognized as a critical element in delivering quality and responsive health services. The patient-provider relationship, conceptualized at the core of PCC in multiple models, remains largely unexamined in HIV care. We conducted a systematic review to better understand the types of PCC interventions implemented to improve patient-provider interactions and how these interventions have improved HIV care continuum outcomes and person-reported outcomes (PROs) among people living with HIV in low- and middle-income countries. METHODS: We searched databases, conference proceedings and conducted manual targeted searches to identify randomized trials and observational studies published up to January 2023. The PCC search terms were guided by the Integrative Model of Patient-Centeredness by Scholl. We included person-centred interventions aiming to enhance the patient-provider interactions. We included HIV care continuum outcomes and PROs. RESULTS: We included 28 unique studies: 18 (64.3%) were quantitative, eight (28.6.%) were mixed methods and two (7.1%) were qualitative. Within PCC patient-provider interventions, we inductively identified five categories of PCC interventions: (1) providing friendly and welcoming services; (2) patient empowerment and improved communication skills (e.g. supporting patient-led skills such as health literacy and approaches when communicating with a provider); (3) improved individualized counselling and patient-centred communication (e.g. supporting provider skills such as training on motivational interviewing); (4) audit and feedback; and (5) provider sensitisation to patient experiences and identities. Among the included studies with a comparison arm and effect size reported, 62.5% reported a significant positive effect of the intervention on at least one HIV care continuum outcome, and 100% reported a positive effect of the intervention on at least one of the included PROs. DISCUSSION: Among published HIV PCC interventions, there is heterogeneity in the components of PCC addressed, the actors involved and the expected outcomes. While results are also heterogeneous across clinical and PROs, there is more evidence for significant improvement in PROs. Further research is necessary to better understand the clinical implications of PCC, with fewer studies measuring linkage or long-term retention or viral suppression. CONCLUSIONS: Improved understanding of PCC domains, mechanisms and consistency of measurement will advance PCC research and implementation.