Factors hindering integration of care for non-communicable diseases within HIV care services in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania: The perspectives of health workers and people living with HIV.

BACKGROUND: Global mortality attributable to non-communicable diseases (NCDs) occurs in more than 36 million people annually with 80% of these deaths occurring in resource limited countries. Among people living with HIV and AIDS (PLHA) studies have reported higher prevalence's of NCDs compared to the general population but most studies do report a narrow range of NCDs commonly hypertension, diabetes and neoplasms and not all. In addition, there is limited reporting, integration of systematic screening and treatment for all NCDs among PLHA attending care, suggesting the NCD burden among PLHA is likely an underestimate. Little is known about factors facilitating or hindering integration of the care and treatment of NCDs within HIV care and treatment clinics (CTCs) in Tanzania.
OBJECTIVE: To explore the perceptions of PLHA and health workers on factors facilitate or hinder the recognition and integration of care for NCDs within CTCs in Dar es Salaam.
METHODS: Inductive content analysis of transcripts from 41 in-depth interviews were conducted with 5 CTC managers (CTC Managers), 9 healthcare providers (DHCP) and 27 people living with HIV (PLHA) attending CTCs and with co-morbid NCDs.
RESULTS: Four themes emerged; the current situation of services available for care and treatment of NCDs among PLHA in CTCs, experiences of PLHA with co-morbid NCDs with access to care and treatment services for NCDs, facilitators of integrating care and treatment of NCDs within CTCs and perceived barriers for accessing and integration of care and treatment of NCDs within CTCs.
CONCLUSIONS: There was a positive attitude among PLHA and healthcare workers towards integration of NCD services within CTC services. This was enhanced by perceived benefits inherent to the services. Factors hindering integration of NCD care and services included; limited and inconsistent supplies such as screening equipment, medications; insufficient awareness of NCDs within PLHA; lack of adequate training of healthcare workers on management of NCD and treatment costs and payment systems.

Introduction

Globally, non-communicable diseases (NCDs) kill more than 36 million people each year with 80% of these deaths occurring in resource limited countries [1]. Data published in the Global Burden of Disease 2010 [2], shows that the NCDs are becoming a significant cause of poor health globally, including in resource limited countries, except sub-Saharan Africa, where NCDs are second to the disease burden of HIV/AIDS. A large proportion of reported NCD deaths and chronic illnesses are reported to be caused by cardiovascular diseases, cancer, chronic respiratory diseases, and metabolic and digestive disorders such as diabetes [3].

Among people living with HIV and AIDS (PLHA) in LMICs, the prevalence of NCDs is higher (range 29%-44%) compared to that in the general population (15%-25%) [2]. However, limited reporting and integration of systematic screening and treatment for NCDs using standard guidelines at primary care levels of health services occurs in sub-Saharan Africa [3]; the NCD burden is thus likely to be underestimated among PLHA. In health care settings in Kenya the prevalence of NCDs among PLHA is reported as 11.5% with hypertension being the most common; however the diagnosis and recording of identified persons with hypertension in patients’ records was as low as 4.9% [3]. A systematic review and meta-analysis of the prevalence of cardiovascular disease, cervical cancer, depression, and diabetes in PLHA in low-and middle-income countries (LMIC) focusing on sub-Saharan Africa, showed estimates (or range) of 21.1%; 1.3%-1.7%; 24.4% and 1.3–1.8% respectively. The estimated rates for risk factors of NCD such as low high-density lipoproteins (52.3%), hypertriglyceridemia (27.2%), obesity 7.8% and elevated low-density (23.2%) were also reported [4]. Furthermore, the prevalence of the less frequently diagnosed neurocognitive impairment (NCI) among PLWHA in Sub Saharan Africa (SSA) may be higher than expected; a systematic review shows prevalence of NCIs among PLHA from seven SSA countries was 6.5 times higher in PLHA compared to in persons without HIV [5]. The same study showed reduction in NCI prevalence, before (43%), compared to six months after (30%) initiation of anti-retroviral therapy (ART) initiation [5]. These evidences suggest an importance of screening and managing NCDs within care and treatment services provided for PLHA.

Over the past several decades, improvements in health care have led to a decrease in mortality in both the general population and persons living with HIV and AIDS [6], and an increase in life expectancy in resource limited countries [7]. While infectious diseases, such as HIV/AIDS and tuberculosis, are particular health burdens for resource limited countries in sub-Saharan Africa [5]; very limited data are available on the epidemiology, natural history and pathogenesis of co-morbid NCDs in the contexts of care for these infectious diseases.

Similar to other LMIC, a very limited number of studies have explored the burden of NCD among PLHA in Tanzania. Amongst PLHA in urban Tanzania the prevalence of hypertension (high blood pressure, defined as a blood pressure of ≥ 140/90mmHg, and diabetes (defined according to WHO criteria) was 26%and 4.2% respectively [8].

Furthermore, with regard to NCDs burden it is important to consider factors that facilitate or hinder integration of HIV care services within CTC. A literature review conducted by Haregu et al. looking into policies and models for NCD integration within HIV clinics revealed evidence related to diseases progress, clinical, and management issues [7]. In this study the author identified models of integration centered to Problem, People, Process and Patient [7]. Another study conducted in African countries identified a limited model in Tanzania for integration in the Reproductive Child Health Clinics among women who present for cervical cancer screening. In this Model 1 represented NCD services integrated into centers originally providing HIV care where by women who tested positive were referred to CTC [9].

This study will be the first in Tanzania to describe from the perspectives of PLHA and health care providers the perceptions on factors facilitate or hinder the recognition and integration of care for NCDs within CTCs in Dar es Salaam.

Methods

Observations

A 5 days an announced onsite check-list guided observation (1 day per site) at the 5 CTCs was conducted by MDH CQI nurses from different districts. The observation was done for the 1st 20–40 patients who arrived at CTCs for routine care.

A total of 130 PLHA were observed for the 5 CTCs. The nurses observed their NCD screening services they received during the visit as well as checked on the pharmacy for the availability of NCD medications. Each site was observed by a CQI nurse from a different district nurse.

Study design

We conducted a descriptive qualitative study which included in-depth interviews and onsite checklist guided observation, in order to obtain a better understanding of the perspectives of PLHA and health care workers on the integration of care for non-communicable diseases within HIV care services. We used purposive sampling to select experienced CTC direct health care providers (DHCP), CTC managers and PLHA who were documented to have a co-morbid NCD, who would be most knowledgeable about NCD services in CTCs and be able to contribute key information to inform our study objectives. We selected and interviewed 27 PLHA, nine DHCP, and five CTC managers.

Data collection tools

Semi-structured interview guides were developed to collect information from PLHA, DHCP and CTC manager participants. We prepared In-depth interview guides based on current literature on the recognition and integration of care for NCDs within CTC. The guides comprised of open-ended questions and probes were developed by the first author and shared to research assistants for increasing the depth of the information provided. The inputs given were incorporated for improvement. Piloting of the tools were done among other PLHA not included in this study to explore their experiences with NCDs services (screening, diagnosis treatment) and factors facilitate or hinder integration of care within CTC. This gave us insight on the truly perspectives on NCD integrations and so helped to formulate more relevant questions. The guides also probed for capacity of health care workers to care for PLHA experience when providing NCD services for PLHA within the context of CTCs and sought recommendations for improving the integration of NCDs services within CTCs. Interview guides were modified depending on the new information emerged during data collection and analysis. Observations were also conducted in each of the five study sites by experienced and trained health care quality improvement nurses not linked to the CTC. The observation check list collected information on NCD screening tests done in routine CTC visit, and availability of/stock of NCD drugs at CTCs.

Study setting

The study was conducted in 5 large CTCs located within the five district referral hospitals in Dar es Salaam region in Tanzania. The selected CTCs served a district wide catchment, and serves a large population of PLHA defined as providing services for 120 to 200 PLHA per day. The site selections allowed for attaining the desired sample within the study time, as well as inclusion of a diverse sample of study participants from across all the five districts of the Dar es Salaam region. We recruited adults PLHA with co-existing NCD (aged 18 years and above) who were enrolled and receiving ART services and health care workers (DHCP) who are directly involved in providing routine HIV care and treatment services at CTCs including nurses and doctors and who had been working in CTC for a minimum of 3 months.

This study excluded PLHA aged less than 18 years, too ill to participate in the IDI, newly employed CTC managers and DHCP. Socio-demographic information including, age and gender, were collected from all types of informants, while for DHCPs and CTC managers, information was also collected on their qualifications, job titles, and duration of providing health care services since graduating as health professionals.

Data collection procedures

Data collection was done with six (6) research assistants who received a refresh training on qualitative data collection. The research assistants had a mix of pre-graduate diplomas in health and social science para professional field (n = 3) postgraduate degree in Public health (n = 1) and undergraduate degrees in the social sciences or Law (n = 2) fields. All RAs also were up to date on research ethics certification (FHI360 certification course). All RAs had prior experiences collecting qualitative data. For this study the training of RAs was overseen by (HST, SH, SM. and MG). The gender distribution of RAs was five female and one male. A saturation point was reached when a total of forty-one (41) interviews were conducted. Twenty-seven (27) interviews with PLHA, 9 DHCP and 5 CTC managers which lasted about 50, 40 and 35 minutes respectively. None of the RAs had contact with the participants before conducting the first interview. Permission to audio-record interviews was requested and all participants agreed to interviews being recorded. All interviews were conducted within the facilities and measures taken to ensure privacy and that informed written consent was provided by all study participants. Upon completion of each field data collection session for both the in-depth interviews and the observations, narrative data transcription was done on the same day sent to the central study team which included the study PI and co-investigators. All audio-records of the data were uploaded to password protected computers to which the PI and co-investigator’s had access, and this provided an additional layer of quality assurance that transcripts were reflective verbatim of each interview session. Feedback sessions with interviewers also discussed probing skills for gaining greater understanding of the meaning behind participant responses to ensure improvements in depth of information provided in subsequent interviews. All interviews were conducted in Swahili.

Data analysis

Data coding was done using the NVIVO software version 8 [10]. Coding refers to the breaking down of narrative data into small units of words called codes [11]. We analyzed the qualitative data based on a content thematic approach [12] where by, firstly the transcripts were read several times to obtain a sense of a whole and identifying the meaning units. That means the short sections of the transcripts seems to be meaningful and that relate to our research questions and objectives. Secondly the formulated meaning units were then condensed in short summary forms as indicated by Graneheim and Lundman [12] as condensed meaning units. Thirdly the condensed meaning units, codes were abstracted further and developed codes and preliminary groups, categories were developed. Then categories which refer high level of abstraction and still indicate the manifest of transcripts. Lastly the constant comparison between categories and the rest of the material themes were constructed and reflected the latent content of the text (Graneheim and Lundman [12]). Coding was conducted with the Kiswahili transcripts to remain close to the text. Codes were then translated into English to develop categories and themes. All the researchers are native Swahili speakers. See Table 1 for more clarification.

Table 1

Example of the analysis process of the main theme, categories and illustrative quotes from respondents.

Theme	Category	Illustrative quotes from respondents
Current situation of availability care and treatment services for NCDs among PLHA in CTCs	Referrals to NCD clinics outside the CTC	“We receive many patients with hypertension here at the CTC, about 30 patients per week or roughly 7–8 patients a day but we don’t provide care for NCDs here (at the CTC)” (DHCP F, 41 years).
	Writing prescriptions for NCD medications at the CTC for patients to purchase
Experiences of PLHA with co-morbid NCDs with access to care and treatment services for NCDs	Access to care for NCDs within the same hospital where a CTC is located	At the CTC clinic they said I have to be treated at a different place, not the CTC but at another NCD clinic in the hospital or at any other hospital, because at the CTC they only deal with the ARVs (Patient, F, 52 years)

Trustworthiness

There are numbers of criteria used in evaluating trustworthiness of the qualitative papers, namely credibility, transferability, dependability and confirmability [13]. In this paper credibility was ensured by purposively sampling in selecting the study participants who are eligible for participation. These participants were key to our research question “What are the factors that facilitate or limit integration of care for Non-Communicable diseases within HIV care services?” The use of observation checklists, IDs and the use of PHLA, DHCP and CTC managers have enhanced credibility of the study.

Ethical considerations

Ethical approval to conduct this study was granted by the National Institute of Medical Research (NIMR) (reference numbers; NIMR/HQ/R.8A/Vol.IX/3362). Permission to conduct the study was requested from hospital and CTC authorities, each group of participants had their own written informed consent. Participants also consented for their interviews to be recorded and anonymity was observed in all data collection tools.

Results

Onsite checklist-based observation findings

A total of 130 PLHA were observed from the 5 CTCs. Each site was observed by a continuous quality improvement (CQI) nurse from a different district. Weight is the most commonly measured parameter for all the PLHA during routine CTC visits; and is assessed in all patients regardless of the type of visit (new patients or follow up patient). However, none of CTCs assessed height consistently or estimated the BMI for PLHA observed. Heights are taken for patients who are seen for the first time only and none used the height results to calculate and estimate BMI during our observation. None of the CTCs conducted clinic based random blood sugar tests during our observation. Only one out of the five hospitals routinely measured patients of blood pressures but only when the patient was suspected by the clinician to have an elevated blood pressure.

Sociodemographic characteristics of the study participants

A total of 27 PLHA with co-morbid NCDs participated in the in-depth interviews. Their mean age was 54 years (ranging from 39–70 years). Twelve (44.4%) were married, 15 (55.5%) were single, widowed or divorced. Five (19%) PLHAs reported no formal education, 17 (62.9%) had completed primary education, two (7%) had completed four years of secondary education while one (4%) had college education. Almost two thirds (59%) reported receiving NCD care at health facilities that where external to where they received HIV CTC services. See Table 2;

Table 2

Demographic characteristics of people living with HIV/AIDS (PLHA) and NCD comorbidity accessing HIV care and treatment clinic services in 2020, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania (N = 27).

Characteristics	Participant N = 27 (%)
Age (Years*)
Mean	54
Range	39–70
Gender
Male	4(14.8%)
Female	23(85.2%)
Marital status
Single	3(11.1%)
Married	12(44.4%)
Divorced	3(11.1%)
Widow/widower	9(33.3%)
Education
No formal education	5(18.5%)
Incomplete primary education	2(7.4%)
Completed primary education	17(62.9%)
Secondary education (form four)	2(7.4%)
College	1(3.7%)
Occupation
Business	16(59.3%)
Employed	1(3.7%)
Unemployed	10(37.0%)
NCD type
Hypertension	13(48.1%)
Diabetes	4(14.8%)
Hypertension & Diabetes	7(25.9%)
Hypertension & Heart problems	2(7.4%)
Hypertension & All types of ulcers	1(3.7%)

Socio demographic characteristics of DHCP and CTC managers

The mean age of CTC managers was 43.5 years, 80% were females and all of them had worked in the health sector for an average of 6.4 years (range 2–11 years). The direct health care provides (DHCP) were aged between 25 and 54 years with a mean age of 38.1 years and they all had been working in health sector for an average of 6.4 years (range 3–16 years). Four (44%) were medical doctors (MDs) while 5 (56%) of the DHCP were COs. See Table 3;

Table 3

Socio- demographic characteristics of CTC managers and direct health care providers (DHCP) in HIV CTCs in 2020, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania (N = 14).

Category	Age	Sex	Qualification	Duration of work in health sector
CTC Managers (n = 5)
Participant 1	50	Male	AMO*	8 years
Participant 2	51	Female	AMO	6 years
Participant 3	37	Female	MD**	11 years
Participant 4	36	Female	MD	5 years
Participant 5	34	Female	MD	2 years
CTC Health Care Workers (n = 9)
Participant 1	25	Female	CO***	4 years
Participant 2	28	Female	CO	3 years
Participant 3	36	Male	MD	3 years
Participant 4	54	Male	CO	15 years
Participant 5	39	Female	CO	6 years
Participant 6	41	Female	MD	5 years
Participant 7	44	Female	CO	3 years
Participant 8	37	Female	MD**	11 years
Participant 9	41	Female	MD	8 years
Total (n) = 14

Key

* Assistant Medical Officer

** Medical Officer

*** Clinical Officer

Four themes emerged based on the narratives of CTC managers, DHCP and PLHA with a co-morbid NCD (Fig 1). These included 1) Current situation of services available for care and treatment of NCD among PLHA at CTCs 2) Experiences with access to NCD care and treatment services of PLHA with co-morbid NCDs, 3) Facilitators of Integrated care and treatment for NCDs within CTCs. 4) Perceived barriers to accessing and integrating the care and treatment of NCDs within CTCs.

Fig 1

Summary of findings showing how the four themes relate to each other and the categories within each theme.

Theme 1: Current situation of availability of care and treatment services for NCDs among PLHA in CTCs

This theme included one category of referrals from CTCs to NCD clinics outside the CTC or CTC staff providing prescriptions for NCD medications to be purchased by patients. From the accounts of DHCPs, a substantial number of PLHA with co-morbid NCDs were attended at CTCs, however care and treatment for their NCDs was not provided within the CTCs as narrated by a DHCP in the following quote, “We receive many patients with hypertension here at the CTC, about 30 patients per week or roughly 7–8 patients a day but we don’t provide care for NCDs here (at the CTC)” (DHCP F, 41 years).

The practices of making patient referrals to NCD clinics outside the CTC or writing prescriptions for NCDs medications at the CTC for patients to purchase was a subtheme indicating how CTCs address the challenge of managing PLHAs with co-morbid NCDs. Both DHCP and CTC managers admitted that treatment services for non-communicable diseases (NCDs) were not available at CTCs, but were offered from separate NCD clinics which are located either within the same hospital or in other public hospitals. At times a prescription is written at the CTC for patients to purchase NCD medications outside the clinic as exemplified by the following quotation; “Yes. Here (at CTC) we screen for NCDs. Once we discover a patient with hypertension, we refer them to the NCD clinic within this hospital or at times at other hospitals, so they attend a different clinic depending on the NCD for their NCD management for instance at the hypertension or the diabetes clinic” (DHCP, F, 25 years). The system used in the CTCs to refer patients with NCDs for services was described as strong because it was based on the type and severity of the NCDs PLHA presented with. DHCPs narrated how the referral system works, and I quote:

“Yes, our referral system is good. We either refer (PLHA) to the specialist or physician depending on their diagnosis and the severity of the NCD. If it happens that they (PLHA) come here when the condition (NCD) is already severe we refer them to specialists at the Muhimbili National Hospital. (DHCP, M, 36 years)

Theme 2: Experiences with accessing care and treatment services for NCDs of PLHA with co-morbid NCDs

This theme covered four categories that focus on accessing care for NCDs a) within the same hospital where a CTC is located, b) a hospital outside the hospital where the CTC is located, c) using self-care practices and d) from centers close to home. These forms of access to NCD care were described to be practiced for various reasons, including convenience and to minimize costs; faith as well as religious beliefs were used by PLHA who cannot afford the costs of their NCD care. These participant attitudes towards their NCD care were influenced by their individual experiences and life situations. In this theme the PLHAs shared their experiences of using allopathic or alternative health systems for treatment of their NCDs.

Accessing care for NCDs within the same hospital where a CTC is located. The majority of PLHA participants stated that NCD services are offered outside the CTC. Even when the diagnosis of the NCD was made at the CTCs they would be transferred to specific NCD clinics within the facility for their NCD care as demonstrated by the following quote:

“At the CTC clinic they said I have to be treated at a different place, not the CTC but at another NCD clinic in the hospital or at any other hospital, because at the CTC they only deal with the ARVs (Patient, F, 52 years)

Accessing NCD treatment from a hospital external to the one where the CTC is located. In some cases, participants accessed NCD services at a facility that was external to the hospital in which their CTC is located and to some PLHA. When this was reported, PLHA found this to be acceptable, mainly because the NCD services they were referred to were offered at no cost to them. The measures that CTC staff take to seek affordable NCD services for PLHA with NCD comorbidities is illustrated in the following quote:

“I received a call from a nurse who works at my CTC in Temeke and she instructed me to go to the Hindu Mandal Hospital (A private hospital) where I received treatment for my high blood pressure for free. Until now I haven’t paid anything although I am getting good services there. The problem is the distance, but the care is free. That’s fair (Patient, F, 52 years)

Referrals would also be made to public hospitals with specialized services, whereby referral to a secondary level hospital may lead to referral to a tertiary level hospital; requiring several steps in negotiating access to NCD services on the part of the patient as noted in the following quotation:

“It was a long time ago when I started the treatment of ARVs at the CTC. I was not feeling okay and felt pain in the shoulder and breast. Then I was advised to go for testing at Mwananyamala and I was referred to Muhimbili after getting the results. Then I was told my heart had expanded and I started attending the clinic there. The doctor wrote laboratory test that I should do (Patient, F, 65 years)”

Self-care and attending for NCD care at nearby centers close to home for convenience and to minimize costs. Patients used several strategies to ensure some access to NCD services given available resources. For example, to minimize transport costs, many patients reported relying on accessing facilities close to home and making decisions themselves about medication use for managing there NCDs. These strategies often circumvent the need for the more expensive close monitoring of treatment progress as elaborated by the following quotations.

“In the beginning I used to go to the diabetes clinic that is where I was referred to, at Muhimbili. But then I started realizing that was too far. Because I understand the medication, I usually write them in a book, and I also do self-tests because I have a glucometer. So, if my sugar goes up or if it goes down, I then know what medications and doses to use. Because if it goes down, I drink a soda and it stabilizes, it means the medication is too much. So, I self-test and I treat myself” (Patient, F, 69 years)

Faith and religious beliefs used by PLHA who cannot afford the costs for their NCD care. PLHA with co-morbid NCDs with inability to afford NCDs treatment costs described their dependency on God as a cure for the NCD as narrated in the following example:

“I depend on God he is the one who knows my life, I do not have the ability (money) to pay for blood pressure drugs. The only support I had was my child who I was depending on to buy these drugs for me and he died. So, it’s hard for us to afford even meals, how will I afford drugs? I leave that to God. (Patient, F, 70 years)

Theme 3: Factors that could potentially facilitate the integration of NCD care in CTCs

Two categories were included in the third theme. These describe potential enablers of NCD integration like the availability of national guidelines on management of NCDs among PLHA in CTCs and the positive attitudes of DHCP about integrating NCDs within CTC clinics.

Availability of national guidelines on management of NCDs in PLHA at CTCs. The DHCP from the CTCs mentioned that they have the national guidelines which help them in providing NCD services accordingly as elaborated in the following quote;

“We are using the guidelines from the Ministry of Health; everything is explained there on how to manage different NCDs among PLHA. (DHCP, F, 41 years)

Positive attitudes of DHCP about integrating NCDs within CTC clinics. The DHCP and CTC managers felt the need to integrate NCD care within CTC services for reasons based on their experiences with the current lack of integrated care. They noted the advantages to patients in terms of their time, reduced challenges related to navigating their NCD care at different clinics/locations, and reduced out of pocket costs for their NCD care, which unlike ART services is not fully subsidized by the government. These sentiments of providers of CTC managers and DHCP are exemplified by the following quotes:

“if we can offer NCD services, patients will receive treatment for two conditions in one place. It will also help in reducing costs to patients, if NCD services will be offered for free. You know currently, if the patient does not have money to pay for services provided at the NCD clinic, they are not provided with services for free. (DHCP, F, 28 years)

“If NCD and HIV services were to be provided under one roof, it would decrease the stress to the patient of moving from clinic to clinic. Also, it will increase adherence to care because as they move from clinic to clinic, they get tired and even decide not to attend the NCD clinic. At times they (patients) have reported to us that after attending their CTC clinic for ART, when they then go to NCD clinics they find the clinic working hours have ended and clinics already closed, thus they miss the NCD services (on the day of referral)” (DHCP, F, 39 years)

Another CTC manager also explained, “In fact, it would be better to integrate NCD care into CTC services to reduce the hassle for patients. We get a patient who tells you, “doctor please hurry up, I want to go to my NCD clinic today I have a diabetes clinic (to attend). If we were to have diabetes tests here and if we were able to check their blood pressure here, then they would be treated right here and we would be able to monitor their progress, except for those who perhaps have complex conditions that would need referral to specialists (CTC Manager, F, 51 years)

Theme 4: Perceived barriers to the provision of integrated services for PLHA with co-morbid NCDs within CTCs

Eight categories were included in the fourth theme. These were barriers described as potential hindrances to integrating NCD care within CTCs by direct health care providers (DHCP) and CTC managers including; a) resource limitations b) both absence and inconsistency in supplies, c) lack of priority given to recognition and treatment of NCDs in CTCs, d) missing electronic payment systems for NCD care in CTCs e) long distances travelled by patients to access care and f) need for NCD recognition and g) NCD treatment refresher course as well as h) ongoing staff training:

Resources limitations in terms of medication stocking, data documentation systems and availability of screening tools for NCD care within CTCs. The hospital systems are not currently designed to facilitate management of NCDs within CTCs. Hospitals do stock NCD medications but do not allocate to CTCs, nor do continuous medical education programmes include regularly training and supporting CTC staff to provide NCD care, as exemplified by the following quotations:

“There is no medicine for treating NCDs at the CTCs therefore you may find a patient who is living with HIV and also suffering from high blood pressure or diabetes but cannot get service at the CTC for these co-morbidities and must schedule another time to attend the NCD clinic because that’s how the hospital is structured, (CTC Manager, F, 37 years)

Limited and inconsistent supplies for existing NCD screening instruments in CTCs. CTC managers noted that though some NCD screening tools were available in their CTCs, there was inconsistent availability of supplies necessary to use these tools. These common challenges, are exemplified by the following quotations, “Yes, instruments like BP machines, blood sugar testing machines. Yah, we have them. We have weighing scales as well. The biggest challenge is inconsistent supplies for us to be able to use them, for example accessing blood sugar testing strips and machine is a problem here., CTC Manager, M, 50 years)

Less priority given to NCD care at CTCs and less awareness of PLHA about NCDs. The CTC managers felt that patients and DHCP at CTCs expect services available at CTCs to only be the provision of a narrow range of HIV care and ARV treatments for PLHA. Other diseases are not looked upon as a priority by both DHCP and patients as narrated by one DHCP in the following quotation, “I think NCDs are not given priority here [at CTC] and even the patients we treat do not give priority to their NCDs care they tend to demand more of the ARVs refill services than care for their NCDs. It is simply because the CTCs do not prioritize such diseases and there is nothing special, we (DHCP) are doing to ensure PLHA understand and demand for NCDs services here. Even if screening services for hypertension and random glucose are available it is easy for PLHA to just collect their ARVs without noticing that such services exist. (DHCP, M, 36 years)

This DHCP quotes, is supported by PLHA descriptions of their challenges of not knowing about their NCDs such as hypertension, how it is treated as well as how to access NCD care. When medications are given to them, they may not have clarity about what medication should be used for what condition. This is exemplified by these concerned patient’s quotes:

“Mmhm! Firstly, for us PLHA with high blood pressure, we do not understand the blood pressure medications, they (DHCP) mix our medications and do not tell us what medication treats what, they just prescribe them silently and they (DHCP) do not help to make us understand better we just take them. At times friends will tell us those don’t work, use this other one. You see and we are not sure what to do. We need them to tell us more. (Patient, F, 60 years)

Lack of regular training of CTC HCP on NCDs management. A DHCP mentioned that, it’s a long time since they received NCD management training, and when they did, it was a short training course. She felt a need for refresher training courses for providers as noted in the following quotation:

“I manage NCD patients using the knowledge I got from college. As I told you, I am an assistant medical officer so I was taught in college… this is not enough; it is good we get updates because it has been a while since I went to school and treatments have changed. (HCP, F, 44 years)

Treatment costs for NCDs may be prohibitive. The DHCPs noted that costs for NCD care are currently a major challenge for many PLHA with co-morbid NCDs. They expressed a concern that currently, at the NCD clinics, diagnosis and treatment is expensive; in addition to a registration fee, patients pay for laboratory and other investigation costs, as well as for treatment. Attending NCD care may not, hence be sustainable. This is narrated as follows by a health care worker:

“In the NCD clinic, treatment is expensive. The PLHA receives consultation service and ARVs for free, but for NCD care they must pay for laboratory tests or any other test requested, whether it’s a full blood picture, or chest x-ray they must pay including for purchasing drugs. So, treatment is expensive and PLHA can’t afford it. As a result, some PLHA abandon the care. (Participant, HCP, F, 28 years)

Moreover, a PLHA added and I quote;

“(sighs) no. we are not satisfied with the costs at all. We have no ability to buy the medication. Being a street cook and I have to try and save and save and save until I get to enough for one bottle which is 17,000–18,000 (shillings); and I need to be injected with two [bottles]! So sometimes I have no choice but to skip using medication… (Patient, F, 39 years)

An integrated payment system for NCD care in CTCs might not be acceptable. HCPs noted that PLHA are used to receiving the fully government subsidized services offered at CTCs. If NCD care and costs were to be integrated in the CTC services, patients may not accept it because they have become accustomed to services at no cost to them. The following quotations exemplify HCPs concerns:

“Integration is possible but the biggest challenge is on the side of finances because in that clinic (NCD) the PLHA is supposed to have ten thousand (shillings) for registration and this is not inclusive of medication. Still the patient will need to pay more for NCD treatment and you may find that the patient does not have the money. If that system is introduced here at CTCs patients will not agree because they are used to free services (Participant, DHCP, 28 years)

Long distances from home to NCD clinics. Some PLHA were attending NCD clinics located long distances from their homes, this meant waking up very early in the morning in order to attend and incurring high transport costs as described in the following quotations:

“…until I arrive at the clinic, I need to get out of the house at 04:00 am and arrive at the clinic at 06:00 am to be there early enough to get treated and leave on time. This is really far (Patient, F, 52 years)

Discussion

Key findings of narrative data from all participants are presented in four themes including; the current situation of services available for care and treatment of NCDs among PLHA in CTCs; experiences of PLHA with co-morbid NCDs in accessing services for NCDs; potential facilitators for NCDs integrated services within CTCs and perceived barriers for accessing and integrating NCD services within CTCs. Most participants noted the limited presence of NCD integrated services within HIV CTCs, and all expressed a need for integrating diagnosis and treatment of NCDs within CTCs. Some authors have outlined the importance of bundling HIV and NCD services within HIV CTC including having adequate treatment adherence supports for improved quality of life, close monitoring of biomarkers that may be predictive of the development of NCDs and provision of psychosocial supports Haregu et al. (2015) [7]. The WHO, through its health system straightening programme, also highlights a number of benefits associated with integrated NCD services in HIV care and treatment service platforms, including improved health and longevity and reductions in the NCDs burden through early screening and treatment [14].

Our findings show PLHA with co-morbid NCDs, experience the current model of access to NCD services as occurring outside the HIV services platform. This approach may risk poor continuity of care and patient progress, as well as patient time constraints when navigating between and within the NCD and HIV service platforms, especially in facilities that do not house both these service platforms. Most patient participant narratives indicated a need for NCD treatments within CTC, and awareness of the advantages of such integration for their health and wellbeing. Studies show that if NCDs are diagnosed early, there is a greater opportunity for reducing NCD associated complications [15]. This may only be possible if resources at CTCs allow for routine NCD screening, diagnosis, treatments and related documentation. According to the UNAIDS Second Meeting of the WHO Global Coordination Mechanism, integrated NCD services on HIV service platforms can result into better screening, treatment and cure for NCDs [14]. The Tanzania Strategic and Action Plan for the Prevention and Control of NCD 2016–2020 has highlighted the importance of shifting from curative to prevention and control measure [16]. This can only be achieved through clearer guidelines for comprehensive routine screening, diagnosis and early treatment on relevant health services platforms.

A number of factors that may facilitate integration of NCD services with in CTC emerged from the narrative data, ranging from the availability of national guidelines for the management of NCDs among PLHA to positive attitudes among PLHA and DHCP towards integrated services. The availability of guidelines for the management of major NCDs in in primary health care facilities in African countries is low and only reported at 17% [17]. This is similar to healthcare’s narrations in the interviews where they acknowledged the availability of guidelines for the management of major NCD such as hypertension and diabetes, while routine screening being behind. The positive attitudes among PLHA and DHCP participants towards integration of NCD services within CTC were in part a result of the perceived advantages in terms of perceived reduction in PLHA time when utilizing health services and the potential for them reducing out-of-pocket health care costs.

Among the reported factors that may hinder integration of NCD within CTC were: Resource limitations in terms of medication stocking for treatment of NCDs, access to NCD data documentation systems and availability of screening tools and point of care aids for NCD care within CTCs. Similar findings on limited or no NCD medical products or supplies in HIV health care services have been reported by Lamptey P., et al. [18]. Both the observation checklist and healthcare provider accounts suggested either limited or inconsistent supplies for screening of existing NCDs in CTCs. This was also reported by Mpondo et al. [19], where authors questioned the level of preparedness for NCD diagnosis and treatment in lower level public hospitals. We also found that continuing medical education offered to CTC staff did not include screening, diagnosis and management of co-morbid NCDs, reported by DHCP informants. Poor training of staffs for NCD management has also been reported by other research teams in Tanzania [9, 19].

Other structural factors such as treatment costs and hospital payment systems may also hamper integration of NCD care within CTC services. Our findings show that while |CTC services for PLHA are currently provided at no costs to patients (i.e., fully subsidized by the government), facilitating access to and affordability of services to the user. However, this is not the case for NCD services, and the Tanzania Strategic and Action Plan for Prevention of Non-Communicable Diseases (NCD) 2016–2020, highlights lack of funding as a major implementation challenge [16]. The absence of fully subsidized NCD services, is evidenced by the existence of a reported cost-share system, where patients are expected to pay out-off pocket expenses as contributions for some NCD services they receive, for example medications and laboratory investigations. The Global Action Plan for Prevention and Control of NCDs 2013–2020 stipulates a need for support at a national level to enable access to NCD drugs, as an approach for the prevention of heart attacks and stroke [20]. Future studies in Tanzania may need to explore more cost-effective ways of purchasing NCD drugs (e.g. bulk purchase) [21], and conducting routine NCD relevant laboratory investigations (e.g. use of high through put laboratory equipment) [16].

Study strengths

This study provides an overview of the experiences of PLHA, healthcare providers and CTC managers and direct health care providers in the integration of NCD services within the HIV treatment services platform and the barriers and potential facilitators of such integration. Inductive content analysis of transcripts with the support of illustrative quotations from study participants provide a better understanding of the current integration status and barriers to implementation that perhaps need to be addressed. Analysis of narrative information derived from three different types of informant strengthens the validity of the study findings [13].

Study limitations

The use of the data from the five large CTC in Dar es Salaam may not have been a representative of the all PLHA, as CTCs with lower patient volume, may have used alternative strategies to support PLHA with NCD co-morbidity. However, the findings do provide a general overview on the experiences of the majority of PLHA with NCD co-morbidities, their attitudes towards integrating HIV and NCD services, and perceived barriers to such integration of services platform. Conducting IDs interviews at the clinic settings, where the participants receive their care/services may have also influenced them towards giving socially acceptable answers to the interview questions. The researchers mitigated this bias by asking open-ended questions, so that to make participants respond in a way that is not socially desirable.

Conclusion

There was a positive attitude among PLHA and healthcare workers towards integration of NCD services within CTC. This was attributed by the perceived benefits associated with the integration of NCD services under one clinic, i.e. NCD services for individuals who are known to have NCD prefers to receive the care with in CTC where they receive their ART services, however the series were no rooved within the CTC. Due to financial challenges PLHA to access transport, they have decided to receive their services at the nearby health care facilities. However, there were number of factors which may impede NCD integration care and services including; limited and inconsistent supplies such as screening equipment, medications; insufficient awareness of NCD within PLHA; lack of adequate training to healthcare workers on management of NCD and treatment costs and payment system.

Recommendations

Integration of NCD care and services with in CTC is very important approach in order to curb the morbidity and mortality related to NCD complications. Government and stakeholders jointly deal with the challenges which hinders integration of NCD care and services within CTC so that screening and management of NCDs among PLHA’s opportunity are not missed.

Semi-structured interview guide for PLHA.

(DOCX)

Click here for additional data file.

Semi-structured interview guide DHCP & CTC managers.

(DOCX)

Click here for additional data file.

Observational checklists at CTC on NCD issues.

(ZIP)

Click here for additional data file.

Transcripts PLHA.

(ZIP)

Click here for additional data file.

8 Mar 2021

PONE-D-21-03870

Factors Hindering Integration of Care for Non-Communicable Diseases within HIV care services in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania; The Perspectives of Health workers and People Living with HIV

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Haruna,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Apr 22 2021 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Tareq Mukattash

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. When reporting the results of qualitative research, we suggest consulting the COREQ guidelines: http://intqhc.oxfordjournals.org/content/19/6/349. In this case, please consider including more information on the number of interviewers, their training and characteristics; and please provide the interview guide used.

In the Methods section, please provide additional information regarding the interview guide development process, including the theories or frameworks which were employed.

Please include in your Methods section (or in Supplementary Information files) the participating hospitals/institutions.

Please provide the observational checklist as Supporting File.

3. We note you have included a table to which you do not refer in the text of your manuscript. Please ensure that you refer to Table 1 and 2 in your text; if accepted, production will need this reference to link the reader to the Table.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: N/A

Reviewer #2: N/A

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: Thanks for considering PLOS ONE for your submission.

I have noted points that I would like to share about your submitted work:

1. The submission contains many writing mistakes (typos, sentence structure issues e.g. run on sentences) (I recommend using english writing aid tools), consistency would help (checklist was written in many different ways)

2. The short title is still long I recommend making it shorter

3. Key words need to be revised and modified to facilitate the chance of locating your work if it gets published

4. I do not agree with including too many subheadings/subtitles as you have done with every section in introduction, try to provide coherent paragraphs , instead.

5. Providing numbers for lines would have made my job and yours easier to track my comments.

6. The second sentence in third paragraph in the introduction needs a reference.

7. The ART abbreviation was not defined at first mention

8. Regarding study design, I did not find the primary assumptions from authors. I think this would raise the issue of personal bias while producing useful data from study participants, which may lead to biased hypothesis representing the phenomenon of interest.

9. I think some of your eligibility and exclusion criteria are redundant.

10. Both sections of sampling approach and study settings include same information (redundant)

11. I recommend that you include further details about the development of the guide of semistructured interviews.

12. Data analysis section includes some of the results , and it lacks the inductive content analysis process of analysis. More details describing the analysis is needed to show the link between extracted data and your reported results.

13. I recommend that you include further details about the open coding/grouping steps and category creation and abstraction processes.

14. I would like to see better organization by providing a conceptual model with your identified categories to give a meaningful sense of describing the selected phenomenon to increase readers understanding and help in generating knowledge.

15. I would suggest to provide names or headings of higher order categories given your driven content characteristic words.

16. Providing Tables/figures including well labeled sub-categories and generic categories and main categories would be helpful

Thank you

Reviewer #2: This is an interesting qualitative study that aimed to explore the perceptions of HIV patients and healthcare workers on facilitators or barriers of the recognition and integration of care for non-communicable diseases within treatment clinics.

Overall, the paper is well written however, it a bit lengthy and both the introduction and the methods can be reduced.

- I enjoyed how the authors narrated the quotes in the results, however, I cannot see the benefit from table 3. It would be easier to limit the examples on themes in one place. I prefer to keep them in the results section and take out table 3.

- i recommend to move Onsite checklist-based observation findings to the prior to the results of thematic analysis.

in table 1: I am not sure if you are meant to say "hypertension" instead of "hypotension"

in table 1: please check the (%) they do not add up for example:

Male 4(14.8%)

Female 23(85.1%)

total is not 100%

same for

Business 16(59.2%)

Employed 1(3.7%)

Unemployed 10(37.0%)

in table 1: ulcers! what kind of ulcers?

I am not sure if table 4 is needed, the summarized results in the Onsite checklist-based observation findings in the results section can be sufficient.

Limitations: there are more limitations to be discussed related to the use of qualitative analyses.

there are few grammatical errors such as " what facilitates or hinder"

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

27 May 2021

Journal Requirements: 1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

I have visited the link for guidance and now files meet the requirements of the PLOS ONE’s style

When reporting the results of qualitative research, we suggest consulting the COREQ guidelines: http://intqhc.oxfordjournals.org/content/19/6/349. In this case, please consider including more information on the number of interviewers, their training and characteristics; and please provide the interview guide used.

Research assistants were trained. The research assistants had a mix of pre-graduate diplomas in health and social science para professional field (n=3) postgraduate degree in Public health (n=1) and undergraduate degrees in the social sciences or Law (n=2) fields. All RAs also were up to date on research ethics certification (FHI360 certification course). Find attached interview guides in the supplementary files. See Page 7.

In the Methods section, please provide additional information regarding the interview guide development process, including the theories or frameworks which were employed.

Information regarding development of interview guide has been added including framework. See Page 5-6

Please include in your Methods section (or in Supplementary Information files) the participating hospitals/institutions.

We have added…five major CTC namely,

Mwananyamala

Temeke Regional Referral Hospital

Sinza Health Centre

Amana regional Referral Hospital

Vijibweni health Centre

Because this was a small study, we have decided not to include names of hospitals in the manuscript to protect DHCP and CTC managers but I have included permission letters for data collection in the Supplementary files

Observational checklist at CTC on NCD issues

Please provide the observational checklist as Supporting File. Attached as Supporting Files

We note you have included a table to which you do not refer in the text of your manuscript. Please ensure that you refer to Table 1 and 2 in your text; if accepted, production will need this reference to link the reader to the Table. Thank you

We have indicated the Tables in the document (Table 1 is for example of the analysis process of the main theme, categories and quotes, Table 2 Demographics data for PHLA and Table 3 Socio-demographics data for DHCP and CTC managers. See Page 8,10 & 11.

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes

Thank you for our comment, we have now improved more on conclusion to make it appropriately based on the data presented in the manuscript. See page 24

(Thank you for the comment)

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: N/A

Reviewer #2: N/A

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

All interviews transcripts and checklists have been provided in the supplementary files.

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes

Thank you for the comment, the manuscript now has been reviewed with professional language reviewer and grammatical errors have been checked and corrected) See page 1 to the end

(Thank you for the compliment)

Reviewer #1 Reviewer #1:

Thanks for considering PLOS ONE for your submission.

I have noted points that I would like to share about your submitted work:

1. The submission contains many writing mistakes (typos, sentence structure issues e.g. run on sentences) (I recommend using English writing aid tools), consistency would help (checklist was written in many different ways).

Thank you for your comment, we have now sent the work to language reviewer and now the typos, sentence structures and use of English aid writing tools have been used to support writing) See page 1 to the end (1-27)

2.The short title is still long I recommend making it shorter. Thank you for the comment, we have now made a shorter title and make it shorter. Now it reads as" Factors Hindering Integration of Care for Non-Communicable Diseases within CTCs"

3. Key words need to be revised and modified to facilitate the chance of locating your work if it gets published Thank you for the comment. We have now modified and revised the key words and now it reads Integration, Non-Communicable Disease, Qualitative, Tanzania, PLHA, Clinic and Treatment Centre, Hypertension, Diabetes.

4. I do not agree with including too many subheadings/subtitles as you have done with every section in introduction, try to provide coherent paragraphs, instead.

Thank you for the comment we have now reduced the subtitles in every section and provided coherent paragraphs. The retained subtitles are for helping a reader to follow through See pages 1 to end (1-27)

5. Providing numbers for lines would have made my job and yours easier to track my comments.

(Thank you for the comment, we have now inserted line numbers to make our job easier. See page 1 to the end)

6. The second sentence in third paragraph in the introduction needs a reference

Reference inserted. See Page 3-4

7. The ART abbreviation was not defined at first mention

Thank you for the comment, we have now defined the ART abbreviation when first mentioned. See page 4)

8. Regarding study design, I did not find the primary assumptions from authors. I think this would raise the issue of personal bias while producing useful data from study participants, which may lead to biased hypothesis representing the phenomenon of interest.

Thank you for the comment, we have now added a sentence…We prepared In-depth interview guides based on current literature on the recognition and integration of care for NCDs within CTC and trustworthiness section as an assumption to show authenticity of the design and quality of data. See page 10

9. I think some of your eligibility and exclusion criteria are redundant. Removed…in the targeted 5 district referral hospital

Removed....and facility/ CTC heads also known as CTC in charge.

Removed… who were not receiving ART

Deleted or did not provide signed informed consent as well as PLHA newly enrolled to

Deleted. those not directly involved with caring for PLHA and newly employed

We have merged this section into Study setting as per COREQ checklist See Page 6.

10. Both sections of sampling approach and study settings include same information (redundant). Thank you for the comment we have now removed sampling approach section and we have recasted study settings section to be more focus and avoid redundancy. See Page 6-7.

11. I recommend that you include further details about the development of the guide of semi structured interviews. Thank you for the comment, we have now added section data collection tools and we have included information on the development of the interview guide. Refer page 5-6

12. Data analysis section includes some of the results, and it lacks the inductive content analysis process of analysis. More details describing the analysis is needed to show the link between extracted data and your reported results. Thank you for the comment, we have now recasted the data analysis section and put more description of analysis showing the link between the extracted data analysis and reported results) See page 8

13. I recommend that you include further details about the open coding/grouping steps and category creation and abstraction processes (Thank you for the comment, we have now recasted the data analysis section and put more description of analysis showing the link between the extracted data and analysis and reported results and put example of analysis See Table 1) See page 8 where the changes of analysis section has been done

14. I would like to see better organisation by providing a conceptual model with your identified categories to give a meaningful sense of describing the selected phenomenon to increase readers understanding and help in generating knowledge.

Conceptual model has been included. See uploaded figure 1

15. I would suggest to provide names or headings of higher order categories given your driven content characteristic words. (We have decided to provide themes which is more of abstraction level from the analysis we therefore suggest for maintaining those headings) See page 12-20.

16. Providing Tables/figures including well labeled sub-categories and generic categories and main categories would be helpful.

We have formulated a table showing some of the theme and categories (Refer Table 1) and figure of summary of results. See page 8 & 12

Reviewer #2 Overall, the paper is well written however, it a bit lengthy and both the introduction and the methods can be reduced. We have reduced some of the repeating quotes and merged some of the subtitle

We now have 27 pages from 35 pages

I enjoyed how the authors narrated the quotes in the results, however, I cannot see the benefit from table 3. It would be easier to limit the examples on themes in one place. I prefer to keep them in the results section and take out table

We have removed Table 3 in the results section. See page 9

i recommend to move Onsite checklist-based observation findings to the prior to the results of thematic analysis.

Thank you for your comment

We have now moved Onsite checklist-based observation findings before IDIs results. See Page 9 & 10

in table 1: I am not sure if you are meant to say "hypertension" instead of "hypotension"

The word hypotension has been changed to hypertension. Please check Table 2. See page 10

in table 1: please check the (%) they do not add up for example:

Male 4(14.8%)

Female 23(85.1%)

total is not 100%

same for

Business 16(59.2%)

Employed 1(3.7%)

Unemployed 10(37.0%) Checked and corrected

Male 4(14.8%)

Female 23(85.2%)

Business 16(59.3%)

Employed 1(3.7%)

Unemployed 10(37.0%)

See Page 10

in table 1: ulcers! what kind of ulcers? Ulcers represent all types of ulcers See page 10

I am not sure if table 4 is needed, the summarized results in the Onsite checklist-based observation findings in the results section can be sufficient.

We have removed table 4 (Refer page 26 & 27)

Limitations: there are more limitations to be discussed related to the use of qualitative analyses.

Thank you for this comment

We have now added another limitation related to study setting.. Conducting IDs interviews at the clinic settings, where the participants receive their care/services may have also influenced them towards giving socially acceptable answers to the interview questions. The researchers mitigated this bias by asking open-ended questions, so that to make participants respond in a way that is not socially desirable. See page 23 & 24

there are few grammatical errors such as " what facilitates or hinder" We have checked for grammatical errors See page 1 to end (27).

Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

Click here for additional data file.

28 Jun 2021

Factors Hindering Integration of Care for Non-Communicable Diseases within HIV care services in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania; The Perspectives of Health workers and People Living with HIV

PONE-D-21-03870R1

Dear Dr. Haruna,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Tareq Mukattash

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #2: All comments have been addressed

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #2: Thank you for addressing all of my comments. I am satisfied with the revised manuscript. I have no further comments.

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #2: No

4 Aug 2021

PONE-D-21-03870R1

Factors Hindering Integration of Care for Non-Communicable Diseases within HIV care services in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania; The Perspectives of Health workers and People Living with HIV

Dear Dr. Haruna:

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Tareq Mukattash

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE