Faculty Bibliography

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:The relationship between food insecurity and access to healthcare in low-resource settings remains unclear. Some studies find that food insecurity is a barrier to accessing care, while others report that food insecurity is associated with a greater need for care, leading to more care utilisation. We use data from the Harambee study in western Kenya to assess the association between food insecurity and difficulty accessing care among people living with HIV (PLWH) with or without comorbid non-communicable diseases (NCDs). METHODS:The Harambee study is a cluster randomised trial that tested the effectiveness of delivering integrated HIV and NCD care for PLWH. In this cross-sectional analysis, we examined baseline data from Harambee participants to investigate the relationship between household food insecurity and difficulty accessing care, using multivariable logistic regression models, controlling for sociodemographic factors and care satisfaction. We tested for effect measure modification by gender and household wealth and stratified analyses by NCD status. RESULTS:Among 1039 participants, 11.1% reported difficulty accessing care, and 18.9% and 51.9% of participants had moderate and severe food insecurity, respectively. Among those with difficulty accessing care, 73.9% cited transportation issues as the major barrier. Difficulty accessing care was greater with higher levels of food insecurity: among participants with low, moderate and severe food insecurity, 5.9%, 9.7% and 14.4% reported difficulty accessing care, respectively. After adjusting for confounders, severe food insecurity was independently associated with difficulty accessing care (adjusted OR=2.5, 95% CI 1.4 to 4.4). There was no statistical evidence for effect measure modification by gender or wealth. CONCLUSIONS:We found that greater food insecurity was associated with greater difficulty accessing care among PLWH with or without NCDs in rural western Kenya. These findings suggest that addressing social determinants of health may be necessary when implementing integrated HIV and NCD care programmes.

Policy engagement is an essential component of implementation research for scaling up interventions targeting non-communicable diseases (NCDs). It refers to the many ways that research team members, implementers and policymakers, who represent government decision-making, connect and interact to explore common interests. Well-conducted engagement activities foster co-production, local contextualization and assist in the successful translation of research evidence into policy and practice. We aimed to identify the challenges and facilitators to policy engagement during the early implementation phase of scale-up research studies. This qualitative study was focused on the research projects that were funded through the Global Alliance for Chronic Diseases in the 2019 round. Nineteen project teams opted to participate, with these studies implemented in 20 countries. Forty-three semi-structured stakeholder interviews, representing research, implementation and government were undertaken between August 2020 and July 2021. Transcripts were open-coded using thematic analysis to extract 63 codes which generated 15 themes reflecting both challenges and facilitators to undertaking policy engagement. Knowledge of the local government structures and trusting relationships provided the foundation for successful engagement and were strengthened by the research. Four cross-cutting concepts for engagement were identified and included: (1) the importance of understanding the policy landscape; (2) facilitating a network of suitable policy champions, (3) providing an environment for policy leaders to genuinely contribute to co-creation and (4) promoting two-way learning during researcher-policymaker engagement. We recommend undertaking formative policy analysis to gain a strategic understanding of the policy landscape and develop targeted engagement plans. Through engagement, researchers must facilitate cohesive vision and build a team of policy champions to advocate NCD research within their networks and spheres of influence. Ensuring equitable partnerships is essential for enabling local ownership and leadership. Further, engagement efforts must create a synergistic policymaker-researcher lens to promote the uptake of evidence into policy.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:The burden of multimorbidity is recognised increasingly in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), creating a strong emphasis on the need for effective evidence-based interventions. Core outcome sets (COS) appropriate for the study of multimorbidity in LMICs do not presently exist. These are required to standardise reporting and contribute to a consistent and cohesive evidence-base to inform policy and practice. We describe the development of two COS for intervention trials aimed at preventing and treating multimorbidity in adults in LMICs. METHODS:To generate a comprehensive list of relevant prevention and treatment outcomes, we conducted a systematic review and qualitative interviews with people with multimorbidity and their caregivers living in LMICs. We then used a modified two-round Delphi process to identify outcomes most important to four stakeholder groups (people with multimorbidity/caregivers, multimorbidity researchers, healthcare professionals and policymakers) with representation from 33 countries. Consensus meetings were used to reach agreement on the two final COS. REGISTRATION/BACKGROUND:https://www.comet-initiative.org/Studies/Details/1580. RESULTS:The systematic review and qualitative interviews identified 24 outcomes for prevention and 49 for treatment of multimorbidity. An additional 12 prevention and 6 treatment outcomes were added from Delphi round 1. Delphi round 2 surveys were completed by 95 of 132 round 1 participants (72.0%) for prevention and 95 of 133 (71.4%) participants for treatment outcomes. Consensus meetings agreed four outcomes for the prevention COS: (1) adverse events, (2) development of new comorbidity, (3) health risk behaviour and (4) quality of life; and four for the treatment COS: (1) adherence to treatment, (2) adverse events, (3) out-of-pocket expenditure and (4) quality of life. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Following established guidelines, we developed two COS for trials of interventions for multimorbidity prevention and treatment, specific to adults in LMIC contexts. We recommend their inclusion in future trials to meaningfully advance the field of multimorbidity research in LMICs. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER/UNASSIGNED:CRD42020197293.

UNav is a computer-vision-based localization and navigation aid that provides step-by-step route instructions to reach selected destinations without any infrastructure in both indoor and outdoor environments. Despite the initial literature highlighting UNav's potential, clinical efficacy has not yet been rigorously evaluated. Herein, we assess UNav against standard in-person travel directions (SIPTD) for persons with blindness or low vision (PBLV) in an ecologically valid environment using a non-inferiority design. Twenty BLV subjects (age = 38 ± 8.4; nine females) were recruited and asked to navigate to a variety of destinations, over short-range distances (<200 m), in unfamiliar spaces, using either UNav or SIPTD. Navigation performance was assessed with nine dependent variables to assess travel confidence, as well as spatial and temporal performances, including path efficiency, total time, and wrong turns. The results suggest that UNav is not only non-inferior to the standard-of-care in wayfinding (SIPTD) but also superior on 8 out of 9 metrics, as compared to SIPTD. This study highlights the range of benefits computer vision-based aids provide to PBLV in short-range navigation and provides key insights into how users benefit from this systematic form of computer-aided guidance, demonstrating transformative promise for educational attainment, gainful employment, and recreational participation.

BACKGROUND:The Bridging Income Generation with Group Integrated Care (BIGPIC) trial in rural Kenya showed that integrating usual care with group medical visits or microfinance interventions reduced systolic blood pressure and cardiovascular risk in participants. We aimed to estimate the incremental cost-effectiveness of three BIGPIC interventions for a modelled cohort and by sex, as well as the cost of implementing these interventions. METHODS:For this analysis, we used data collected during the BIGPIC trial, a four-group, cluster-randomised trial conducted in the western Kenyan catchment area of the Academic Model Providing Access to Healthcare. BIGPIC enrolled participants from 24 rural health facilities in rural western Kenya aged 35 years or older with either increased blood pressure or diabetes. Participants were assigned to receive either usual care, group medical visits, microfinance, or a combination of group medical visits and microfinance (GMV-MF). Our model estimated the incremental cost-effectiveness of the three BIGPIC interventions via seven health states (ie, a hypertensive state, five chronic cardiovascular-disease states, and a death state) by simulating transitions between health states for a hypothetical cohort of individuals with hypertension on the basis of QRISK3 scores. In every cycle, participants accrued costs and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) associated with their health state. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated for the entire modelled cohort and by sex by dividing the incremental cost by the incremental effectiveness of the next most expensive intervention. The main outcome of this analysis was ICERs for each intervention evaluated. This analysis is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02501746). FINDINGS/RESULTS:Between Feb 6, 2017, and Dec 29, 2019, 2890 people were recruited to the BIGPIC trial. 2020 (69·9%) of 2890 participants were female and 870 (30·1%) were male. At baseline, mean QRISK3 score was 11·5 (95% CI 11·1-11·9) for the trial population, 11·9 (11·5-12·2) for male participants, and 11·3 (11·0-11·6) for female participants. For the population of Kenya, group medical visits were estimated to cost US$7 more per individual than usual care and result in 0·005 more DALYs averted (ICER $1455 per DALY averted). Microfinance was estimated to cost $19 more than group medical visits but was only estimated to avert 0·001 more DALYs. Relative to group medical visits, GMV-MF was estimated to cost $29 more and avert 0·009 more DALYs ($3235 per DALY averted). Relative to usual care, GMV-MF was estimated to cost $37 more and avert 0·014 more DALYs ($2601 per DALY averted). In the first year of the intervention, usual care was estimated to be the least expensive intervention to implement ($87 per participant; $10 238 per health-facility catchment area [HFCA]), then group medical visits ($99 per participant; $12 268 per HFCA), then microfinance ($120 per participant; $14 172 per HFCA), with GMV-MF estimated to be the most expensive intervention to implement ($139 per participant; $16 913 per HFCA). INTERPRETATION/CONCLUSIONS:Group medical visits and GMV-MF were estimated to be cost-effective strategies to improve blood-pressure control in rural Kenya. However, which intervention to pursue depends on resource availability. Policy makers should consider these factors, in addition to sex differences in programme effectiveness, when selecting optimal implementation strategies. FUNDING/BACKGROUND:US National Institutes of Health.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:Adolescent girls and young women (AGYW) in India face additional health inequities compared to their male peers, as gender norms constrain agency for prevention and self-care. The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic and associated lockdowns deepened health inequities and often worsened mental health, but the impacts on agency are unclear. This exploratory sequential mixed methods paper examined mental health and COVID-19 elements that exacerbated or mitigated adverse consequences for AGYW in low-income communities in Mumbai. METHODS:We conducted semi-structured interviews with AGYW (aged 15-25 years; N = 60) and adults (parents, healthcare providers, community-based organization representative; N = 30). We administered a structured survey to AGYW (N = 150) to assess health concerns, depression and anxiety symptoms (using the PHQ-8 and GAD-7 scales), and experiences during COVID-19. We analyzed qualitative data using the constant comparative approach in Atlas.ti, and quantitative data using R and SPSS. RESULTS:Qualitative data revealed that AGYW faced stressors and had limited agency during lockdowns due to limited access to education, financial insecurity, and community violence. Quantitative data indicated that limited agency in the context of COVID-19 was significantly associated with depression and anxiety. Financial resources to address COVID-19 created new employment and leadership opportunities for AGYW to become COVID educators and preschool teachers; participation in these opportunities was associated with less anxiety. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSIONS:Pandemic stress was difficult for low-income AGYW in Mumbai. Mitigating programs for COVID-19 control helped address acute needs and enable capabilities. Exploring similar themes among a broader population of youth can help design strategies and opportunities for young people in low-income communities during health emergencies.

INTRODUCTION/UNASSIGNED:Scaling up interventions targeting non-communicable diseases (NCDs) is a global health priority, and implementation research can contribute to that effort. In 2019, the Global Alliance for Chronic Diseases funded 27 implementation research studies to improve evidence for scaling up interventions targeting prevention and/or control of hypertension and/or diabetes in low-resource settings. We examined these studies to improve the understanding of the implementation factors, including challenges and facilitators, that influence the early implementation phase of scale-up research projects targeting NCDs. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:This qualitative study was undertaken between August 2020 and July 2021. 43 semi-structured interviews were conducted with project investigators, implementers and policymakers, across 19 diverse scale-up projects, being implemented in 20 countries. The transcripts were inductively, open-coded using thematic analysis. Generated themes were mapped systematically to four out of five domain categorisations of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR); the innovation domain fell outside the scope of this study. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:Highlighted findings using CFIR are: (i) outer setting: influence of politics, lack of coordination between government departments and differing agendas towards NCDs hindered implementation while reliable and trustworthy government connections proved useful; (ii) inner setting: commitment of resources for implementation was a challenge while research capacity, work culture and trustworthy networks facilitated implementation; (iii) individuals: high-level stakeholder support and leadership was essential; (iv) process: extensive time and efforts required for stakeholder engagement towards local contextualisation was challenging, while collaborating, joint reflection, effective communication and adaptation facilitated. COVID-19 provided both challenges and opportunities and these varied depending on the intervention characteristics and study objectives. CONCLUSION/UNASSIGNED:Researchers supporting the scale-up of complex interventions targeting NCDs need to leverage on existing trusting relationships and foster equitable stakeholder partnerships through research. Interpersonal skills and good communication are essential complements to research expertise and must be considered during capacity building.

BACKGROUND:Poverty can be a robust barrier to HIV care engagement. We assessed the extent to which delivering care for HIV, diabetes and hypertension within community-based microfinance groups increased savings and reduced loan defaults among microfinance members living with HIV. METHODS:We analyzed cluster randomized trial data ascertained during November 2020-May 2023 from 57 self-formed microfinance groups in western Kenya. Groups were randomized 1:1 to receive care for HIV and non-communicable diseases in the community during regular microfinance meetings (intervention) or at a health facility during routine appointments (standard care). Community and facility care provided clinical evaluations, medications, and point-of-care testing. The trial enrolled 900 microfinance members, with data collected quarterly for 18-months. We used a two-part model to estimate intervention effects on microfinance shares purchased, and a negative binomial regression model to estimate differences in loan default rates between trial arms. We estimated effects overall and by participant characteristics. RESULTS:Participants' median age and distance from a health facility was 52 years and 5.6 km, respectively, and 50% reported earning less than $50 per month. The probability of saving any amount (>$0) through purchasing microfinance shares was 2.7 percentage points higher among microfinance group members receiving community vs. facility care. Community care recipients and facility care patients saved $44.90 and $25.24 over 18-months, respectively, and the additional amount saved by community care recipients was statistically significant (p = 0.036). Overall and in stratified analyses, loan defaults rates were not statistically significantly different between community and facility care patients. CONCLUSIONS:Receiving integrated care in the community was significantly associated with modest increases in savings. We did not find any significant association between community-delivered care and reductions in loan defaults among HIV-positive microfinance group members. Longer follow up examination and formal mediation analyses are warranted.