Selecting implementation strategies to improve implementation of integrated PrEP for pregnant and postpartum populations in Kenya: a sequential explanatory mixed methods analysis
Abstract Background There is a higher risk for HIV acquisition during pregnancy and postpartum. Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is recommended during this period for those at high risk of infection; integrated delivery in maternal and child health (MCH) clinics is feasible and acceptable but requires implementation optimization. Methods The PrEP in Pregnancy, Accelerating Reach and Efficiency study (PrEPARE; NCT04712994) engaged stakeholders to prioritize determinants of PrEP delivery (using Likert scores) and prioritize PrEP delivery implementation strategies. Using a sequential explanatory mixed methods design, we conducted quantitative surveys with healthcare workers at 55 facilities in Western Kenya and a stakeholder workshop (including nurses, pharmacists, counselors, and county and national policymakers), yielding visual plots of stakeholders’ perceived feasibility and effectiveness of the strategies. A stepwise elimination process was used to identify seven strategies for empirical testing. Facilitator debriefing reports from the workshop were used to qualitatively assess the decision-making process. Results Among 146 healthcare workers, the strongest reported barriers to PrEP delivery were insufficient providers and inadequate training, insufficient space, and high volume of patients. Sixteen strategies were assessed, 14 of which were included in the final analysis. Among rankings from 182 healthcare workers and 44 PrEP policymakers and implementers, seven strategies were eliminated based on low post-workshop ranking scores (bottom 50th percentile) or being perceived as low feasibility or low effectiveness for at least 50% of the workshop groups. The top seven strategies included delivering PrEP within MCH clinics instead of pharmacies, fast-tracking PrEP clients to reduce waiting time, delivering PrEP-related health talks in waiting bays, task shifting PrEP counseling, task shifting PrEP risk assessments, training different providers to deliver PrEP, and retraining providers on PrEP delivery. All top seven ranked strategies were grouped into bundles for subsequent testing. Facilitator debriefing reports generally aligned with rankings but noted how stakeholders’ decision-making changed when considering the impact of strategies on facility staff and non-PrEP clients. Conclusions The most impactful barriers to integrated PrEP delivery in MCH clinics were insufficient staffing and space. Implementation strategies prioritized through multiple methods of stakeholder input focused on co-location of services and increasing clinic efficiency. Future testing of these stakeholder-prioritized strategy bundles will be conducted to assess the effectiveness and implementation outcomes..
| Medienart: |
E-Artikel |
|---|
| Erscheinungsjahr: |
2023 |
|---|---|
| Erschienen: |
2023 |
| Enthalten in: |
Zur Gesamtaufnahme - volume:4 |
|---|---|
| Enthalten in: |
Implementation Science Communications - 4(2023), 1, Seite 12 |
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
|---|
| Beteiligte Personen: |
Sarah Hicks [VerfasserIn] |
|---|
| Links: |
doi.org [kostenfrei] |
|---|
| Themen: |
HIV infections/prevention and control |
|---|
| doi: |
10.1186/s43058-023-00481-9 |
|---|
| funding: |
|
|---|---|
| Förderinstitution / Projekttitel: |
|
| PPN (Katalog-ID): |
DOAJ092918476 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000naa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | DOAJ092918476 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20240412221521.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 240412s2023 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1186/s43058-023-00481-9 |2 doi | |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)DOAJ092918476 | ||
| 035 | |a (DE-599)DOAJ107918de1ebb4e1180f96a43b44a0af9 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 050 | 0 | |a R5-920 | |
| 100 | 0 | |a Sarah Hicks |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Selecting implementation strategies to improve implementation of integrated PrEP for pregnant and postpartum populations in Kenya: a sequential explanatory mixed methods analysis |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2023 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a Computermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 520 | |a Abstract Background There is a higher risk for HIV acquisition during pregnancy and postpartum. Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is recommended during this period for those at high risk of infection; integrated delivery in maternal and child health (MCH) clinics is feasible and acceptable but requires implementation optimization. Methods The PrEP in Pregnancy, Accelerating Reach and Efficiency study (PrEPARE; NCT04712994) engaged stakeholders to prioritize determinants of PrEP delivery (using Likert scores) and prioritize PrEP delivery implementation strategies. Using a sequential explanatory mixed methods design, we conducted quantitative surveys with healthcare workers at 55 facilities in Western Kenya and a stakeholder workshop (including nurses, pharmacists, counselors, and county and national policymakers), yielding visual plots of stakeholders’ perceived feasibility and effectiveness of the strategies. A stepwise elimination process was used to identify seven strategies for empirical testing. Facilitator debriefing reports from the workshop were used to qualitatively assess the decision-making process. Results Among 146 healthcare workers, the strongest reported barriers to PrEP delivery were insufficient providers and inadequate training, insufficient space, and high volume of patients. Sixteen strategies were assessed, 14 of which were included in the final analysis. Among rankings from 182 healthcare workers and 44 PrEP policymakers and implementers, seven strategies were eliminated based on low post-workshop ranking scores (bottom 50th percentile) or being perceived as low feasibility or low effectiveness for at least 50% of the workshop groups. The top seven strategies included delivering PrEP within MCH clinics instead of pharmacies, fast-tracking PrEP clients to reduce waiting time, delivering PrEP-related health talks in waiting bays, task shifting PrEP counseling, task shifting PrEP risk assessments, training different providers to deliver PrEP, and retraining providers on PrEP delivery. All top seven ranked strategies were grouped into bundles for subsequent testing. Facilitator debriefing reports generally aligned with rankings but noted how stakeholders’ decision-making changed when considering the impact of strategies on facility staff and non-PrEP clients. Conclusions The most impactful barriers to integrated PrEP delivery in MCH clinics were insufficient staffing and space. Implementation strategies prioritized through multiple methods of stakeholder input focused on co-location of services and increasing clinic efficiency. Future testing of these stakeholder-prioritized strategy bundles will be conducted to assess the effectiveness and implementation outcomes. | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a HIV infections/prevention and control | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Humans | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Pregnancy and postpartum | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Strategy prioritization | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Nominal group technique | |
| 653 | 0 | |a Medicine (General) | |
| 700 | 0 | |a Ben Odhiambo |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 0 | |a Felix Abuna |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 0 | |a Julia C. Dettinger |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 0 | |a Nancy Ngumbau |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 0 | |a Laurén Gómez |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 0 | |a Joseph Sila |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 0 | |a George Oketch |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 0 | |a Enock Sifuna |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 0 | |a Bryan J. Weiner |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 0 | |a Grace John-Stewart |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 0 | |a John Kinuthia |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 0 | |a Anjuli D. Wagner |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i In |t Implementation Science Communications |d BMC, 2020 |g 4(2023), 1, Seite 12 |w (DE-627)DOAJ000008788 |x 26622211 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:4 |g year:2023 |g number:1 |g pages:12 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://doi.org/10.1186/s43058-023-00481-9 |z kostenfrei |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://doaj.org/article/107918de1ebb4e1180f96a43b44a0af9 |z kostenfrei |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://doi.org/10.1186/s43058-023-00481-9 |z kostenfrei |
| 856 | 4 | 2 | |u https://doaj.org/toc/2662-2211 |y Journal toc |z kostenfrei |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_DOAJ | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 4 |j 2023 |e 1 |h 12 | ||