OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate how poor retention in HIV care impacts time to viral suppression after initiating highly active antiretroviral therapy. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study design, employing a medical chart review, was conducted at an academic infectious disease clinic at the University of Kentucky. Patients seeking care between 2003 and 2011 were included in the study. A log-normal model was employed to determine the factors associated with time to viral suppression. RESULTS: Of the 532 patients in the study, 426 (80.1%) patients were virally suppressed. Controlling for insurance status, race, baseline CD4 counts, and viral loads, the expected time to viral suppression for non optimal retainers was longer compared to optimal retainers (100% retained in care; time ratio: 2.04; 95% confidence interval: 1.40-2.90). CONCLUSION: Researchers should continue to study the impact of retention on clinical outcomes and strategies to improve retention and reengage those lost to follow-up back into care.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate how poor retention in HIV care impacts time to viral suppression after initiating highly active antiretroviral therapy. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study design, employing a medical chart review, was conducted at an academic infectious disease clinic at the University of Kentucky. Patients seeking care between 2003 and 2011 were included in the study. A log-normal model was employed to determine the factors associated with time to viral suppression. RESULTS: Of the 532 patients in the study, 426 (80.1%) patients were virally suppressed. Controlling for insurance status, race, baseline CD4 counts, and viral loads, the expected time to viral suppression for non optimal retainers was longer compared to optimal retainers (100% retained in care; time ratio: 2.04; 95% confidence interval: 1.40-2.90). CONCLUSION: Researchers should continue to study the impact of retention on clinical outcomes and strategies to improve retention and reengage those lost to follow-up back into care.
Authors: Anne Zinski; Andrew O Westfall; Lytt I Gardner; Thomas P Giordano; Tracey E Wilson; Mari-Lynn Drainoni; Jeanne C Keruly; Allan E Rodriguez; Faye Malitz; D Scott Batey; Michael J Mugavero Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2015-08-13 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Charles Farmer; Baligh R Yehia; John A Fleishman; Richard Rutstein; W Christopher Mathews; Ank Nijhawan; Richard D Moore; Kelly A Gebo; Allison L Agwu Journal: J Pediatric Infect Dis Soc Date: 2014-10-19 Impact factor: 3.164
Authors: Oni J Blackstock; Arthur E Blank; Jason J Fletcher; Niko Verdecias; Chinazo O Cunningham Journal: AIDS Patient Care STDS Date: 2015-01 Impact factor: 5.078
Authors: Diana M Sheehan; Kristopher P Fennie; Daniel E Mauck; Lorene M Maddox; Spencer Lieb; Mary Jo Trepka Journal: AIDS Patient Care STDS Date: 2017-04 Impact factor: 5.078
Authors: Michael G Eberhart; Baligh R Yehia; Amy Hillier; Chelsea D Voytek; Danielle J Fiore; Michael Blank; Ian Frank; David S Metzger; Kathleen A Brady Journal: J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr Date: 2015-05-01 Impact factor: 3.731
Authors: Ahnalee M Brincks; Karen Shiu-Yee; Lisa R Metsch; Carlos Del Rio; Robert P Schwartz; Petra Jacobs; Georgina Osorio; James L Sorensen; Daniel J Feaster Journal: AIDS Behav Date: 2019-10
Authors: Karen S Ingersoll; Rebecca A Dillingham; Jennifer E Hettema; Mark Conaway; Jason Freeman; George Reynolds; Sharzad Hosseinbor Journal: Health Psychol Date: 2015-12 Impact factor: 4.267
Authors: Kathleen A McManus; Anne Rhodes; Steven Bailey; Lauren Yerkes; Carolyn L Engelhard; Karen S Ingersoll; George J Stukenborg; Rebecca Dillingham Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2016-05-03 Impact factor: 9.079