Counseling vs. Alarm Device for HIV Treatment Adherence
Author Information
Author(s): Michael H. Chung, Barbra A. Richardson, Kenneth Tapia, Sarah Benki-Nugent, James N. Kiarie, Jane M. Simoni, Julie Overbaugh, Mena Attwa, Grace C. John-Stewart
Primary Institution: University of Washington
Hypothesis
Does intensive counseling or the use of an alarm device improve adherence to HIV treatment in resource-limited settings?
Conclusion
Intensive early adherence counseling significantly improved adherence and reduced virologic treatment failure, while the alarm device had no effect.
Supporting Evidence
- Participants receiving counseling were 29% less likely to have poor adherence.
- Counseling reduced the likelihood of viral failure by 59%.
- The alarm device showed no significant impact on adherence or viral outcomes.
- Counseling sessions were based on a standardized protocol.
- Participants were followed for 18 months after starting treatment.
- High levels of adherence were observed among participants overall.
Takeaway
This study found that talking to patients about their HIV treatment helps them take their medicine better, while using a reminder device didn't help at all.
Methodology
A randomized controlled trial with four groups: counseling, alarm device, both, and neither, followed for 18 months.
Potential Biases
Baseline differences between intervention arms may have influenced outcomes.
Limitations
The study was limited by a relatively short follow-up period and potential biases in participant retention.
Participant Demographics
66% female, median age 36 years, diverse socioeconomic backgrounds.
Statistical Information
P-Value
p=0.01 for viral failure, p=0.055 for adherence <80%
Confidence Interval
95% CI 0.21–0.81 for viral failure, 95% CI 0.49–1.01 for adherence <80%
Statistical Significance
p<0.05
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
Want to read the original?
Access the complete publication on the publisher's website