IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0228148.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Optimizing differentiated treatment models for people living with HIV in urban Zimbabwe: Findings from a mixed methods study

Author

Listed:
  • Miriam Rabkin
  • Michael Strauss
  • Joanne E Mantell
  • Munyaradzi Mapingure
  • Tsitsi B Masvawure
  • Matthew R Lamb
  • Jennifer M Zech
  • Godfrey Musuka
  • Innocent Chingombe
  • Martin Msukwa
  • Rodrigo Boccanera
  • Clorata Gwanzura
  • Gavin George
  • Tsitsi Apollo

Abstract

Introduction: Zimbabwe is scaling up HIV differentiated service delivery (DSD) to improve treatment outcomes and health system efficiencies. Shifting stable patients into less-intensive DSD models is a high priority in order to accommodate the large numbers of newly-diagnosed people living with HIV (PLHIV) needing treatment and to provide healthcare workers with the time and space needed to treat people with advanced HIV disease. DSD is also seen as a way to improve service quality and enhance retention in care. National guidelines support five differentiated antiretroviral treatment models (DART) for stable HIV-positive adults, but little is known about patient preferences, a critical element needed to guide DART scale-up and ensure person-centered care. We designed a mixed-methods study to explore treatment preferences of PLHIV in urban Zimbabwe. Methods: The study was conducted in Harare, and included 35 health care worker (HCW) key informant interviews (KII); 8 focus group discussions (FGD) with 54 PLHIV; a discrete choice experiment (DCE) in which 500 adult DART-eligible PLHIV selected their preferences for health facility (HF) vs. community location, individual vs. group meetings, provider cadre and attitude, clinic operation times, visit frequency, visit duration and cost to patient; and a survey with the 500 DCE participants exploring DART knowledge and preferences. Results: Patient preferences were consistent in the FGDs, DCE and survey. Participants strongly preferred respectful HCWs, HF-based services, individual DART models, and less costly services. Patients also preferred less frequent visits and shorter wait times. They were indifferent to variations in HCW cadre and distances from home to HF. These preferences were mostly homogenous, with only minor differences between male vs. female and older vs. younger patients. HCWs in the KII correctly characterized facility-based individual models as the one most favored by patients; HCWs also preferred this model, which they felt decongested HFs and reduced their workload. Conclusions: DART-eligible PLHIV in Harare found it relatively easy to access HFs, and preferred attributes associated with facility-based individual models. Prioritizing these for scale-up in urban areas may be the most efficient way to sustain positive patient outcomes and increase health system performance.

Suggested Citation

  • Miriam Rabkin & Michael Strauss & Joanne E Mantell & Munyaradzi Mapingure & Tsitsi B Masvawure & Matthew R Lamb & Jennifer M Zech & Godfrey Musuka & Innocent Chingombe & Martin Msukwa & Rodrigo Boccan, 2020. "Optimizing differentiated treatment models for people living with HIV in urban Zimbabwe: Findings from a mixed methods study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(1), pages 1-14, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0228148
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0228148
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0228148
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0228148&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0228148?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kruk, M.E. & Paczkowski, M. & Mbaruku, G. & De Pinho, H. & Galea, S., 2009. "Women's preferences for place of delivery in rural Tanzania: A population-based discrete choice experiment," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 99(9), pages 1666-1672.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Miho Sato & Deogratias Maufi & Upendo John Mwingira & Melkidezek T Leshabari & Mayumi Ohnishi & Sumihisa Honda, 2017. "Measuring three aspects of motivation among health workers at primary level health facilities in rural Tanzania," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(5), pages 1-17, May.
    2. Sushma Rajbanshi & Mohd Noor Norhayati & Nik Hussain Nik Hazlina, 2021. "Perceptions of Good-Quality Antenatal Care and Birthing Services among Postpartum Women in Nepal," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(13), pages 1-13, June.
    3. Alessandro Mengoni & Chiara Seghieri & Sabina Nuti, 2013. "The application of discrete choice experiments in health economics: a systematic review of the literature," Working Papers 201301, Scuola Superiore Sant'Anna of Pisa, Istituto di Management.
    4. Saleh Babazadeh & Philip Anglewicz & Janna M Wisniewski & Patrick K Kayembe & Julie Hernandez & Jane T Bertrand, 2020. "The influence of health facility-level access measures on modern contraceptive use in Kinshasa, DRC," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(7), pages 1-20, July.
    5. Bezu, Sosina & Binyaruka, Peter & Mæstad, Ottar & Somville, Vincent, 2021. "Pay-for-performance reduces bypassing of health facilities: Evidence from Tanzania," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 268(C).
    6. Timothy Abuya & Charlotte E Warren & Nora Miller & Rebecca Njuki & Charity Ndwiga & Alice Maranga & Faith Mbehero & Anne Njeru & Ben Bellows, 2015. "Exploring the Prevalence of Disrespect and Abuse during Childbirth in Kenya," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(4), pages 1-13, April.
    7. Afis A Agboola & Oluwaseun T Esan & Oluwasegun T Afolabi & Taiwo A Soyinka & Adedunmola O Oluwaranti & Adeniji Adetayo, 2018. "Economic burden of the therapeutic management of mental illnesses and its effect on household purchasing power," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(9), pages 1-13, September.
    8. Van Rijsbergen, Bart & D’Exelle, Ben, 2013. "Delivery Care in Tanzania: A Comparative Analysis of Use and Preferences," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 276-287.
    9. Abiiro, Gilbert Abotisem & Torbica, Aleksandra & Kwalamasa, Kassim & De Allegri, Manuela, 2014. "Eliciting community preferences for complementary micro health insurance: A discrete choice experiment in rural Malawi," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 160-168.
    10. Matthew Quaife & Fern Terris-Prestholt & Gian Luca Di Tanna & Peter Vickerman, 2018. "How well do discrete choice experiments predict health choices? A systematic review and meta-analysis of external validity," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 19(8), pages 1053-1066, November.
    11. Carlos Díaz-Caro & Eva Crespo-Cebada & Borja Encinas Goenechea & Ángel-Sabino Mirón Sanguino, 2023. "Trinomial: Return-Risk and Sustainability: Is Sustainability Valued by Investors? A Choice Experiment for Spanish Investors Applied to SDG 12," Risks, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-12, August.
    12. Hari S Iyer & Lisa R Hirschhorn & Marie Paul Nisingizwe & Emmanuel Kamanzi & Peter C Drobac & Felix C Rwabukwisi & Michael R Law & Andrew Muhire & Vincent Rusanganwa & Paulin Basinga, 2017. "Impact of a district-wide health center strengthening intervention on healthcare utilization in rural Rwanda: Use of interrupted time series analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(8), pages 1-19, August.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0228148. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.