Advertisement

AIDS and Behavior

, Volume 23, Issue 4, pp 1016–1031 | Cite as

Use of an mHealth Intervention to Improve Engagement in HIV Community-Based Care Among Persons Recently Released from a Correctional Facility in Washington, DC: A Pilot Study

  • Irene KuoEmail author
  • Tao Liu
  • Rudy Patrick
  • Claudia Trezza
  • Lauri Bazerman
  • Breana J. Uhrig Castonguay
  • James Peterson
  • Ann Kurth
  • Curt G. Beckwith
Original Paper

Abstract

We examined the preliminary effectiveness of a computerized counseling session plus post-incarceration text messaging intervention (CARE + Corrections) to support ART adherence and linkage/engagement in community care among recently incarcerated persons with HIV in Washington, D.C. Recently incarcerated persons with HIV ≥ 18 years old were recruited from the D.C. jail or community outreach and randomized to CARE + Corrections or control arm. Participants completed assessments at baseline, 3-months and 6-months. Multivariable random effects modeling identified predictors of suppressed viral load (≤ 200 copies/mL) and engagement in HIV care at 6 months. Participants (N = 110) were aged 42 (IQR 30–49); 58% male, 24% female, 18% transgender, 85% Black, and lifetime incarceration was a median of 7 years (IQR 2–15). More controls had a regular healthcare provider at baseline. Although not statistically significant, intervention participants had increased odds of viral suppression versus controls at 6 months (AOR 2.04; 95% CI 0.62, 6.70). Those reporting high ART adherence at baseline had higher odds of viral suppression at follow-up (AOR 10.77; 95% CI 1.83, 63.31). HIV care engagement was similar between the two groups, although both groups reported increased engagement at 6 months versus baseline. We observed a positive but non-significant association of viral suppression in the CARE + Corrections group, and care engagement increased in both groups after 6 months. Further attention to increasing viral suppression among CJ-involved persons with HIV upon community reentry is warranted.

Keywords

HIV Engagement in care Incarcerated persons mHealth 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We would like to acknowledge funding from the National Institutes of Health, National Institute on Drug Abuse (R01DA030747), National Institute on Allergy and Infectious Diseases and institutional support from the Providence/Boston Center for AIDS Research (P30AI42853) and the District of Columbia Center for AIDS Research (P30AI117970). We would also like to acknowledge former study staff members (Avery Barber, Alice Cates, Halli Olsen, Anthony Rawls, and Hannah Yellin), our District of Columbia Department of Corrections partners (Drs. Beth Mynett and Reena Chakraborty) and community-based partners and advisory board for their support and assistance in conducting this work. Lastly, we would like to give our deepest thanks to the study participants without whom we could not do this work.

Funding

This study was funded by the National Institutes of Health National Institute on Drug Abuse (R01DA030747). The authors also received institutional support from the Providence/Boston Center for AIDS Research (P30AI42853) and the District of Columbia Center for AIDS Research (P30AI117970).

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

Irene Kuo, Tao Liu, Rudy Patrick, Claudia Trezza, Lauri Bazerman, Breana Uhrig Castonguay, James Peterson and Ann Kurth have all declared no conflicts of interest. Curt Beckwith has received research support from Gilead Sciences.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

References

  1. 1.
    Dennis AC, Barrington C, Hino S, Gould M, Wohl D, Golin CE. “You’re in a world of chaos”: experiences accessing HIV care and adhering to medications after incarceration. J Assoc Nurses AIDS Care. 2015;26(5):542–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Elkington KS, Jaiswal J, Spector AY, et al. Can TasP approaches be implemented in correctional settings?: a review of HIV testing and linkage to community HIV treatment programs. J Health Care Poor Underserved. 2016;27(2a):71–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Iroh PA, Mayo H, Nijhawan AE. The HIV care cascade before, during, and after incarceration: a systematic review and data synthesis. Am J Public Health. 2015;105(7):e5–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Baillargeon J, Giordano TP, Rich JD, et al. Accessing antiretroviral therapy following release from prison. JAMA. 2009;301(8):848–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Clements-Nolle K, Marx R, Pendo M, Loughran E, Estes M, Katz M. Highly active antiretroviral therapy use and HIV transmission risk behaviors among individuals who are HIV infected and were recently released from jail. Am J Public Health. 2008;98(4):661–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Stephenson BL, Wohl DA, Golin CE, Tien HC, Stewart P, Kaplan AH. Effect of release from prison and re-incarceration on the viral loads of HIV-infected individuals. Public Health Rep. 2005;120(1):84–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Westergaard RP, Spaulding AC, Flanigan TP. HIV among persons incarcerated in the USA: a review of evolving concepts in testing, treatment, and linkage to community care. Curr Opin Infect Dis. 2013;26(1):10–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Spaulding AC, Seals RM, Page MJ, Brzozowski AK, Rhodes W, Hammett TM. HIV/AIDS among inmates of and releasees from US correctional facilities, 2006: declining share of epidemic but persistent public health opportunity. PLoS ONE. 2009;4(11):e7558.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Simoni JM, Kutner BA, Horvath KJ. Opportunities and challenges of digital technology for HIV treatment and prevention. Curr HIV/AIDS Rep. 2015;12(4):437–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Horvath T, Azman H, Kennedy GE, Rutherford GW. Mobile phone text messaging for promoting adherence to antiretroviral therapy in patients with HIV infection. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012;3:CD009756.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Naar-King S, Parsons JT, Johnson AM. Motivational interviewing targeting risk reduction for people with HIV: a systematic review. Curr HIV/AIDS Rep. 2012;9(4):335–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kurth AE, Spielberg F, Cleland CM, et al. Computerized counseling reduces HIV-1 viral load and sexual transmission risk: findings from a randomized controlled trial. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2014;65(5):611–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Finitsis DJ, Pellowski JA, Johnson BT. Text message intervention designs to promote adherence to antiretroviral therapy (ART): a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. PLoS ONE. 2014;9(2):e88166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kalichman SC, Kalichman MO, Cherry C, Eaton LA, Cruess D, Schinazi RF. Randomized factorial trial of phone-delivered support counseling and daily text message reminders for HIV treatment adherence. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2016;73(1):47–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Orrell C, Cohen K, Mauff K, Bangsberg DR, Maartens G, Wood R. A randomized controlled trial of real-time electronic adherence monitoring with text message dosing reminders in people starting first-line antiretroviral therapy. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2015;70(5):495–502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Shet A, De Costa A, Kumarasamy N, et al. Effect of mobile telephone reminders on treatment outcome in HIV: evidence from a randomised controlled trial in India. BMJ. 2014;349:g5978.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Alemagno SA, Stephens RC, Stephens P, Shaffer-King P, White P. Brief motivational intervention to reduce HIV risk and to increase HIV testing among offenders under community supervision. J Correct Health Care. 2009;15(3):210–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Taxman FS, Walters ST, Sloas LB, Lerch J, Rodriguez M. Motivational tools to improve probationer treatment outcomes. Contemp Clin Trials. 2015;43:120–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lerch J, Walters ST, Tang L, Taxman FS. Effectiveness of a computerized motivational intervention on treatment initiation and substance use: results from a randomized trial. J Subst Abuse Treat. 2017;80:59–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Chandler RK, Kahana SY, Fletcher B, et al. Data collection and harmonization in HIV research: the seek, test, treat, and retain initiative at the National Institute on drug abuse. Am J Public Health. 2015;105(12):2416–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    District of Columbia Department of Health HIV/AIDS Hepatitis STDs and Tuberculosis Administration. District of Columbia Department of Health HIV/AIDS, Hepatitis, STD and TB Epidemiology Annual Report, 2015. Washington, DC: District of Columbia Department of Health, 2016.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kurth A, Kuo I, Peterson J, et al. Information and communication technology to link criminal justice reentrants to HIV care in the community. AIDS Res Treat. 2013;2013:547381.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Peterson J, Cota M, Gray H, et al. Technology use in linking criminal justice reentrants to HIV care in the community: a qualitative formative research study. J Health Commun. 2015;20(3):245–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Beckwith C, Castonguay BU, Trezza C, et al. Gender differences in HIV care among criminal justice-involved persons: baseline data from the CARE + corrections study. PLoS ONE. 2017;12(1):e0169078.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Skeels MM, Kurth A, Clausen M, Severynen A, Garcia-Smith H. CARE + user study: usability and attitudes towards a tablet pc computer counseling tool for HIV+ men and women. AMIA Annual Symposium proceedings AMIA Symposium. 2006:729-33.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Spielberg F, Kurth AE, Severynen A, et al. Computer-facilitated rapid HIV testing in emergency care settings: provider and patient usability and acceptability. AIDS Educ Prev. 2011;23(3):206–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Daeppen JB, Yersin B, Landry U, Pecoud A, Decrey H. Reliability and validity of the alcohol use disorders identification test (AUDIT) imbedded within a general health risk screening questionnaire: results of a survey in 332 primary care patients. Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2000;24(5):659–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Pankow J, Simpson DD, Joe GW, Rowan-Szal GA, Knight K, Meason P. examining concurrent validity and predictive utility for the addiction severity Index and Texas Christian University (TCU) short forms. J Offender Rehabil. 2012;51(1–2):78–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Prins A, Ouimette P, Kimerling R, et al. The primary care PTSD screen (PC-PTSD): development and operating characteristics. Primary Care Psychiatry. 2003;9:9–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Andresen EM, Malmgren JA, Carter WB, Patrick DL. Screening for depression in well older adults: evaluation of a short form of the CES-D (Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale). Am J Prev Med. 1994;10(2):77–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Buscher A, Hartman C, Kallen MA, Giordano TP. Validity of self-report measures in assessing antiretroviral adherence of newly diagnosed, HAART-naive, HIV patients. HIV Clin Trials. 2011;12(5):244–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Moher D, Schulz KF, Altman DG. The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomised trials. Clin Oral Investig. 2003;7(1):2–7.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Little RJA, Rubin DB. Statistical analysis with missing data. 2nd ed. New York: Wiley; 2002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    van Buuren S. Flexible imputation of missing data. 1st ed. Boca Raton: Chapman and Hall/CRC; 2012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Gelman A, Van Mechelen I, Verbeke G, Heitjan DF, Meulders M. Multiple imputation for model checking: completed-data plots with missing and latent data. Biometrics. 2005;61(1):74–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Wohl DA, Golin CE, Knight K, et al. Randomized controlled trial of an intervention to maintain suppression of HIV viremia after prison release: the imPACT trial. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2017;75(1):81–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Christopoulos KA, Riley ED, Carrico AW, et al. A randomized controlled trial of a text messaging intervention to promote virologic suppression and retention in care in an urban safety-net human immunodeficiency virus clinic: the connect4care trial. Clin Infect Dis. 2018;67(5):751–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Meyer JP, Cepeda J, Springer SA, Wu J, Trestman RL, Altice FL. HIV in people reincarcerated in Connecticut prisons and jails: an observational cohort study. Lancet HIV. 2014;1(2):e77–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Wohl DA, Scheyett A, Golin CE, et al. Intensive case management before and after prison release is no more effective than comprehensive pre-release discharge planning in linking HIV-infected prisoners to care: a randomized trial. AIDS Behav. 2011;15(2):356–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Spaulding AC, Messina LC, Kim BI, et al. Planning for success predicts virus suppressed: results of a non-controlled, observational study of factors associated with viral suppression among HIV-positive persons following jail release. AIDS Behav. 2013;17(Suppl 2):S203–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Springer SA, Qiu J, Saber-Tehrani AS, Altice FL. Retention on buprenorphine is associated with high levels of maximal viral suppression among HIV-infected opioid dependent released prisoners. PLoS ONE. 2012;7(5):e38335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Christopoulos KA, Scheer S, Steward WT, et al. Examining clinic-based and public health approaches to ascertainment of HIV care status. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2015;69(Suppl 1):S56–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Castel AD, Tang W, Peterson J, et al. Sorting through the lost and found: are patient perceptions of engagement in care consistent with standard continuum of care measures? J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2015;69(Suppl 1):S44–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Machtinger EL, Wilson TC, Haberer JE, Weiss DS. Psychological trauma and PTSD in HIV-positive women: a meta-analysis. AIDS Behav. 2012;16(8):2091–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Applebaum AJ, Bedoya CA, Hendriksen ES, Wilkinson JL, Safren SA, O’Cleirigh C. Future directions for interventions targeting PTSD in HIV-infected adults. J Assoc Nurses AIDS Care. 2015;26(2):127–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Cunningham WE, Andersen RM, Katz MH, et al. The impact of competing subsistence needs and barriers on access to medical care for persons with human immunodeficiency virus receiving care in the United States. Med Care. 1999;37(12):1270–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Milloy MJ, Montaner JS, Wood E. Incarceration of people living with HIV/AIDS: implications for treatment-as-prevention. Curr HIV/AIDS Rep. 2014;11(3):308–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Booker CA, Flygare CT, Solomon L, et al. Linkage to HIV care for jail detainees: findings from detention to the first 30 days after release. AIDS Behav. 2013;17(Suppl 2):S128–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Irene Kuo
    • 1
    Email author
  • Tao Liu
    • 2
  • Rudy Patrick
    • 1
    • 3
  • Claudia Trezza
    • 1
  • Lauri Bazerman
    • 4
  • Breana J. Uhrig Castonguay
    • 5
  • James Peterson
    • 1
  • Ann Kurth
    • 6
  • Curt G. Beckwith
    • 4
    • 7
  1. 1.Department of Epidemiology and BiostatisticsGeorge Washington University Milken Institute School of Public HealthWashingtonUSA
  2. 2.Brown University School of Public HealthProvidenceUSA
  3. 3.University of California San DiegoSan DiegoUSA
  4. 4.The Miriam HospitalProvidenceUSA
  5. 5.University of North CarolinaChapel HillUSA
  6. 6.Yale University School of NursingNew HavenUSA
  7. 7.Alpert Medical School of Brown UniversityProvidenceUSA

Personalised recommendations