↓ Skip to main content

Treatment guidelines and early loss from care for people living with HIV in Cape Town, South Africa: A retrospective cohort study

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS Medicine, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (68th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
137 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Treatment guidelines and early loss from care for people living with HIV in Cape Town, South Africa: A retrospective cohort study
Published in
PLOS Medicine, November 2017
DOI 10.1371/journal.pmed.1002434
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ingrid T. Katz, Richard Kaplan, Garrett Fitzmaurice, Dominick Leone, David R. Bangsberg, Linda-Gail Bekker, Catherine Orrell

Abstract

South Africa has undergone multiple expansions in antiretroviral therapy (ART) eligibility from an initial CD4+ threshold of ≤200 cells/μl to providing ART for all people living with HIV (PLWH) as of September 2016. We evaluated the association of programmatic changes in ART eligibility with loss from care, both prior to ART initiation and within the first 16 weeks of starting treatment, during a period of programmatic expansion to ART treatment at CD4+ ≤ 350 cells/μl. We performed a retrospective cohort study of 4,025 treatment-eligible, non-pregnant PLWH accessing care in a community health center in Gugulethu Township affiliated with the Desmond Tutu HIV Centre in Cape Town. The median age of participants was 34 years (IQR 28-41 years), almost 62% were female, and the median CD4+ count was 173 cells/μl (IQR 92-254 cells/μl). Participants were stratified into 2 cohorts: an early cohort, enrolled into care at the health center from 1 January 2009 to 31 August 2011, when guidelines mandated that ART initiation required CD4+ ≤ 200 cells/μl, pregnancy, advanced clinical symptoms (World Health Organization [WHO] stage 4), or comorbidity (active tuberculosis); and a later cohort, enrolled into care from 1 September 2011 to 31 December 2013, when the treatment threshold had been expanded to CD4+ ≤ 350 cells/μl. Demographic and clinical factors were compared before and after the policy change using chi-squared tests to identify potentially confounding covariates, and logistic regression models were used to estimate the risk of pre-treatment (pre-ART) loss from care and early loss within the first 16 weeks on treatment, adjusting for age, baseline CD4+, and WHO stage. Compared with participants in the later cohort, participants in the earlier cohort had significantly more advanced disease: median CD4+ 146 cells/μl versus 214 cells/μl (p < 0.001), 61.1% WHO stage 3/4 disease versus 42.8% (p < 0.001), and pre-ART mortality of 34.2% versus 16.7% (p < 0.001). In total, 385 ART-eligible PLWH (9.6%) failed to initiate ART, of whom 25.7% died before ever starting treatment. Of the 3,640 people who started treatment, 58 (1.6%) died within the first 16 weeks in care, and an additional 644 (17.7%) were lost from care within 16 weeks of starting ART. PLWH who did start treatment in the later cohort were significantly more likely to discontinue care in <16 weeks (19.8% versus 15.8%, p = 0.002). After controlling for baseline CD4+, WHO stage, and age, this effect remained significant (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 1.30, 95% CI 1.09-1.55). As such, it remains unclear if early attrition from care was due to a "healthy cohort" effect or to overcrowding as programs expanded to accommodate the broader guidelines for treatment. Our findings were limited by a lack of generalizability (given that these data were from a single high-volume site where testing and treatment were available) and an inability to formally investigate the effect of crowding on the main outcome. Over one-quarter of this ART-eligible cohort did not achieve the long-term benefits of treatment due to early mortality, ART non-initiation, or early ART discontinuation. Those who started treatment in the later cohort appeared to be more likely to discontinue care early, and this outcome appeared to be independent of CD4+ count or WHO stage. Future interventions should focus on those most at risk for early loss from care as programs continue to expand in South Africa.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 137 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 137 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 29 21%
Researcher 25 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 10%
Other 11 8%
Student > Postgraduate 6 4%
Other 22 16%
Unknown 30 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 50 36%
Nursing and Health Professions 17 12%
Social Sciences 11 8%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 2%
Psychology 3 2%
Other 13 9%
Unknown 40 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 13 March 2018.
All research outputs
#6,932,988
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from PLOS Medicine
#4,367
of 5,161 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#103,489
of 336,130 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS Medicine
#79
of 84 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,161 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 77.7. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 336,130 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 84 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.