The impact of the housing status on clinical outcomes and health care utilization among individuals living with HIV

ABSTRACT

The lack of stable housing can impair access and continuity of care for patients living with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). This study investigated the relationship between housing status assessed at multiple time points and several core HIV-related outcomes within the same group of HIV patients experiencing homelessness. Patients with consistently stable housing (CSH) during the year were compared to patients who lacked CSH (non-CSH group). The study outcomes included HIV viral load (VL), CD4 counts, and health care utilization. Multivariable and propensity weighted analyses were used to assess outcomes adjusting for potential group differences. Of 208 patients, 88 (42%) had CSH and 120 (58%) were non-CSH. Patients with CSH had significantly higher proportion of VL suppression and higher mean CD4 counts. The frequency of nurse visits in the CSH group was less than a half of that in the non-CSH group. Patients with CSH were less likely to be admitted to the medical respite facility, and if admitted, their length of stay was about a half of that for the non-CSH group. Our study findings show that patients with CSH had significantly better HIV virologic control and immune status as well as improved health care utilization.     

Cardiovascular risk assessment tools: A scoping review

ObjectivesThe objective of this review was to describe cardiovascular risk (CVR) assessment methods and to identify evidence-based practice recommendations when dealing with population at risk of developing cardiovascular diseases.Review methods and data sourcesA literature review following the Arksey and O'Malley scoping review methodology was conducted. By using appropriate key terms, literature searches were conducted in PubMed, SciELO, Cochrane Library, Dialnet, ENFISPO, Medigraphic, ScienceDirect, Cuiden, and Lilacs databases. A complementary search on websites related to the area of interest was conducted. Articles published in English or Spanish in peer-review journals between 2010 and 2017. Critical appraisal for methodological quality was conducted. Data was extracted using ad-hoc tables and qualitatively synthesized.ResultsAfter eliminating duplicates, 55 325 records remained, and 1432 records were selected for screening. Out of these, 88 full-text articles were selected for eligibility criteria, and finally, 67 studies were selected for this review, and 25 studies were selected for evidence synthesis. In total, 23 CVR assessment tools have been identified, pioneered by the Framingham study. Qualitative findings were grouped into four thematic areas: assessment tools and scores, CVR indicators, comparative models, and evidence-based recommendations.ConclusionsIt is necessary to adapt the instruments to the epidemiological reality of the population. The most appropriate way to estimate CVR is to choose the assessment tool that best suits individual conditions, accompanied by a comprehensive assessment of the patient. More research is required to determine a single, adequate, and reliable tool.     

Beyond intraocular pressure: Optimizing patient-reported outcomes in glaucoma

Glaucoma, an irreversible blinding condition affecting 3–4% adults aged above 40 years worldwide, is set to increase with a rapidly aging global population. Raised intraocular pressure (IOP) is a major risk factor for glaucoma where the treatment paradigm is focused on managing IOP using medications, laser, or surgery regimens. However, notwithstanding IOP and other clinical parameters, patient-reported outcomes, including daily functioning, emotional well-being, symptoms, mobility, and social life, remain the foremost concerns for people being treated for glaucoma. These outcomes are measured using objective patient-centered outcome measures (PCOMs) and subjective patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). Studies using PCOMs have shown that people with glaucoma have several mobility, navigational and coordination challenges; reading and face recognition deficits; and are slower in adapting to multiple real-world situations when compared to healthy controls. Similarly, studies have consistently demonstrated, using PROMs, that glaucoma substantially and negatively impacts on peoples’ self-reported visual functioning, mobility, independence, emotional well-being, self-image, and confidence in healthcare, compared to healthy individuals, particularly in those with late-stage disease undergoing a heavy treatment regimen. The patient-centred effectiveness of current glaucoma treatment paradigms is equivocal due to a lack of well-designed randomized controlled trials; short post-treatment follow-up periods; an inappropriate selection or availability of PROMs; and/or an insensitivity of currently available PROMs to monitor changes especially in patients with newly diagnosed early-stage glaucoma. We provide a comprehensive, albeit non-systematic, critique of the psychometric properties, limitations, and recent advances of currently available glaucoma-specific PCOMs and PROMs. Finally, we propose that item banking and computerized adaptive testing methods can address the multiple limitations of paper-pencil PROMs; customize their administration; and have the potential to improve healthcare outcomes for people with glaucoma.