Nadia O'Brien1,2, Claire Godard-Sebillotte1, Lashanda Skerritt1, Janice Dayle2, Allison Carter3, Susan Law4,5, Joseph Cox2, Neil Andersson1,6, Angela Kaida7, Mona Loutfy8,9, Alexandra de Pokomandy1,2. 1. Department of Family Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, Canada. 2. Chronic Viral Illness Service/Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, Canada. 3. Kirby Institute, UNSW Sydney, Sydney, Australia. 4. Institute for Better Health, Trillium Health Partners, Mississauga, Canada. 5. Institute for Health Policy, Management & Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada. 6. Centro de Investigación de Enfermedades Tropicales, Universidad Autónoma de Guerrero, Acapulco, Mexico. 7. Faculty of Health Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, Canada. 8. Women's College Research Institute, Women's College Hospital, Toronto, Canada. 9. Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
Abstract
Background: Women living with HIV in Canada experience barriers to comprehensive HIV care. We sought to describe care gaps across a typology of care. Methods: We analyzed baseline data from the Canadian HIV Women's Sexual and Reproductive Health Cohort Study (CHIWOS). A typology of care was characterized by primary HIV physician and care setting. Quality-of-care indicators included the following: Pap test, Pap test discussions, reproductive goal discussions, breast cancer screening, antiretroviral therapy (ART) use, adherence, HIV viral load, and viral load discussions. We defined comprehensive care with three indicators: Pap test, viral load, and either reproductive goal discussions over last 3 years or breast cancer screening, as indicated. Multivariable logistic regression analyses measured associations between care types and quality-of-care indicators. Results: Among women living with HIV accessing HIV care, 56.4% (657/1,164) experienced at least one gap in comprehensive care, most commonly reproductive goal discussions. Women accessed care from three types of care: (1) physicians (specialist and family physicians) in HIV clinics (71.6%); (2) specialists in non-HIV clinics (17.6%); and (3) family physicians in non-HIV clinics (10.8%), with 55.5%, 63.9%, and 50.8% gaps in comprehensive care, respectively. Type 3 care had double the odds of not being on ART: adjusted odds ratio (AOR 2.09, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.16-3.75), while Type 2 care had higher odds of not having discussed the importance of Pap tests (AOR 1.48, 95% CI 1.00-2.21). Discussion: Women continue to experience gaps in care, across types of care, indicating the need to evaluate and strengthen women-centered models of care.
Background: Women living with HIV in Canada experience barriers to comprehensive HIV care. We sought to describe care gaps across a typology of care. Methods: We analyzed baseline data from the Canadian HIV Women's Sexual and Reproductive Health Cohort Study (CHIWOS). A typology of care was characterized by primary HIV physician and care setting. Quality-of-care indicators included the following: Pap test, Pap test discussions, reproductive goal discussions, breast cancer screening, antiretroviral therapy (ART) use, adherence, HIV viral load, and viral load discussions. We defined comprehensive care with three indicators: Pap test, viral load, and either reproductive goal discussions over last 3 years or breast cancer screening, as indicated. Multivariable logistic regression analyses measured associations between care types and quality-of-care indicators. Results: Among women living with HIV accessing HIV care, 56.4% (657/1,164) experienced at least one gap in comprehensive care, most commonly reproductive goal discussions. Women accessed care from three types of care: (1) physicians (specialist and family physicians) in HIV clinics (71.6%); (2) specialists in non-HIV clinics (17.6%); and (3) family physicians in non-HIV clinics (10.8%), with 55.5%, 63.9%, and 50.8% gaps in comprehensive care, respectively. Type 3 care had double the odds of not being on ART: adjusted odds ratio (AOR 2.09, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.16-3.75), while Type 2 care had higher odds of not having discussed the importance of Pap tests (AOR 1.48, 95% CI 1.00-2.21). Discussion: Women continue to experience gaps in care, across types of care, indicating the need to evaluate and strengthen women-centered models of care.
Entities:
Keywords:
HIV; chronic disease; primary health care; quality of health care; women's health