Open Access
Open Peer Review

This article has Open Peer Review reports available.

How does Open Peer Review work?

Antiretroviral treatment adherence among HIV patients in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa

  • Karl Peltzer1, 2Email author,
  • Natalie Friend-du Preez3,
  • Shandir Ramlagan1 and
  • Jane Anderson4
BMC Public Health201010:111

DOI: 10.1186/1471-2458-10-111

Received: 12 September 2009

Accepted: 5 March 2010

Published: 5 March 2010

Abstract

Background

Successful antiretroviral treatment is dependent on sustaining high rates of adherence. In the southern African context, only a handful of studies (both quantitative and qualitative) have looked at the determinants including a health behaviour theory of adherence to antiretroviral therapy. The aim of this study is to assess factors including the information, motivation and behavioural skills model (IMB) contributing to antiretroviral (ARV) adherence six months after commencing ARVs at three public hospitals in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa.

Methods

Using systematic sampling, 735 HIV-positive patients were selected prior to commencing on ART from outpatient departments from three hospitals and followed-up at six months and interviewed with a questionnaire.

Results

A good proportion of patients were found to be adherent using both adherence instruments (visual analog scale = VAS 82.9%; Adult AIDS Clinical Trials Group = AATCG 70.8%). After adjusting for significant socio-economic variables, both the VAS and the dose, schedule and food adherence indicator found levels of adherence amongst urban residents to be almost 3 times greater than that of rural residents. After adjusting for health-related variables, for both indicators better adherence was associated with low depression and poorer adherence was associated with poor environmental factors. Adjusted odds ratios for adherence when taking into account different behavioural variables were for both adherence indicators, discrimination experiences were associated with lower adherence, and higher scores in adherence information and behavioural skills were associated with higher adherence. For the VAS adherence indicator, higher social support scores were associated with higher adherence. For the dose, schedule and food adherence indicator, using herbal medicines for HIV was associated with lower adherence.

Conclusion

For the patients in this study, particularly those not living in urban areas, additional support may be needed to ensure patients are able to attend appointments or obtain their medications more easily. Adherence information and behavioural skills as part of the IMB model should be strengthened to improve adherence. Further psychological support is also required and patients' perceived need for ARTs should be routinely assessed.

Background

The clinical efficacy of antiretroviral therapies (ART) in suppressing the HIV virus and improving survival rates for those living with HIV has been well documented [15]. However, successful antiretroviral treatment is dependent on sustaining high rates of adherence (correct dosage, taken on time and in the correct way - either with or without food). The minimum level of adherence required for antiretrovirals (ARVs) to work effectively is 95% [6]. Although more potent ARV regimens can allow for effective viral suppression at moderate levels of adherence [79], non or partial adherence can lead to the development of drug-resistant strains of the virus. In resource-limited settings where older first-line therapies are being used, the development and transmission of drug-resistant strains of HIV will greatly limit the treatment options available.

A meta-analysis conducted by Mills et al. [10], examined barriers and facilitators of ART adherence in 72 developed and 12 developing country settings (5 African). Barriers to adherence in both settings included fear of disclosure, forgetfulness, health illiteracy, substance abuse, complicated regimens, and patients being away from their medications. In developing settings, financial constraints and a disruption in access to medications were also common barriers. Other factors known to affect adherence include issues related to gender [11, 12] and stigma [1315]. In the southern African context, only a handful of studies (both quantitative and qualitative) have looked at the determinants of adherence to antiretroviral therapy. Common barriers identified include fear of disclosure, alcohol use, traditional medicine use, feeling better on treatment, inadequate knowledge about the disease and ARVs, stigma, transport costs, [1620], lack of social support (financial and emotional) [17], stigma, discrimination, depression and hopelessness, not being able to disclose their HIV status and a lack of food [19, 20], service-related factors [18, 20], patients' beliefs and behaviours [18], pill burden and drug side-effects [18, 20].

There is a lack of studies investigating treatment competency factors and also utilizing a health behaviour theory such as the Health Belief Model [18] in relation to ART adherence in Africa [21]. One promising health behaviour theory that has been tailored specifically to designing interventions to promote adherence to ART in developed countries is the information, motivation and behavioural skills model (IMB) [22]. The aim of this study is to assess factors including the information, motivation and behavioural skills model (IMB) contributing to ARV adherence six months after commencing ARVs at three public hospitals in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa.

Methods

Design and setting

This is a cross-sectional study of all treatment-naúve patients (N = 735) recruited from all three public hospitals in Uthukela health district in KwaZulu-Natal from October 2007 to February 2008. The District has one regional and two district hospitals, one private hospital, three primary health care facilities, 24 fixed clinics and 17 mobile clinics with 177 visiting points [23]. Initiation to ART is done at the three public hospitals. Some patients are referred to primary care clinics for ARV collection but return to the hospital for six monthly visits. HIV treatment is provided free of charge. The treatment programme provides patients with access to counselling, nutritional assistance, psychosocial support and social welfare evaluation.

Sample and procedure

All ARV-naúve patients who were about to commence ARVs (18 years and above) and who consecutively attended the HIV clinics during the recruitment period were eligible for this study. Physicians from the three selected public clinics asked every consecutively visiting ART-naïve patient meeting the inclusion criteria of being 18 years or over if they would like to complete a confidential survey and interview concerning their health and social situation. This would include information from their medical records on details of their medical condition, laboratory tests and treatment. If the potential participant indicated an interest in participating, the health care provider then referred them to an external HSRC research assistant for possible research participation. The interviews were conducted by four trained external HSRC researchers (one or two per HIV clinic) in interview administration of the semi-structure interview schedule. Interviewers were trained over one week in questionnaire administration and ethics procedures. Recruitment took place over a period of four months, with 97.8% participation rate. The questionnaire was translated into the major language spoken in the study area (Zulu) and verified by a second translator. Where inconsistencies were found, these were corrected. Pre-testing of the questionnaire was completed with five HIV-positive persons not involved in the study. More details about the setting, sampling procedure and recruitment have been described elsewhere [24]. Patients at six months follow-up were interviewed at the clinic. Patients who failed to attend for planned follow-up were contacted by telephone and up to two home visits.

Ethics approval was obtained from the HSRC ethics committee and approval was obtained from the Provincial Department of Health in KwaZulu-Natal.

Measures

Patients were interviewed with an anonymous questionnaire that requests information on sociodemographic characteristics, clinical history and health-related characteristics and health beliefs. Clinical data relating to date of HIV diagnosis, HIV acquisition and transmission risk factors, current CD4 cell count, viral load (Chiron 3.0 bDNA), opportunistic infections, HIV and non-HIV medications was obtained from the medical chart.

The Revised Sign and Symptom Checklist for Persons with HIV Disease

The SSC-HIVrev is a 72-item checklist of HIV/AIDS specific physical and psychological symptoms, scored using the following scale: 0 = not present today, 1 = mild, 2 = moderate, 3 = severe [25]. Female-specific symptoms were removed, reducing the total to 64 [24]. An HIV symptom index (symptom intensity) was created which weights each symptom's presence (0 or 1) by a rating of 1-3 (mild, moderate or severe). Cronbach's alpha of this scale for this sample was 0.84.

Health-Related Quality of Life

The WHOQOL-HIV BREF is based on the WHOQOLHIV measure, one of the two World Health Organization's QoL instruments for use with HIV-infected populations [26]. This instrument is intended for cross-cultural use and is meant to be accessible to researchers in low-income countries. The individual respondent's overall QoL are measured directly: 'How would you rate your quality of life?' (ranging from 'very poor' to 'very good'); 'How satisfied are you with your health?' (ranging from 'very dissatisfied' to 'very satisfied'). The 31-item WHOQOLHIV BREF produces six domain scores, which denote an individual's subjective perception of their own QoL in the following domains: physical, psychological, level of independence, social relationships, physical environment and spirituality. The individual items are rated on a 5-point Likert scale where '1' indicates 'low, negative perceptions' and '5' indicates 'high, positive perceptions.' Domain scores are scaled in a positive direction, where higher scores denote higher perceived QoL [27]. Reliability was good for five of the six domains (Cronbach's alpha 0.60-0.72) and lower for the social relationships domain (Cronbach's alpha 0.46). Cronbach's alpha for the whole HRQoL scale was 0.88 for this sample.

Alcohol Use Disorder

Identification Test (AUDIT)-C focuses solely upon consumption of alcohol (i.e. the frequency of drinking, the quantity consumed at a typical occasion, and the frequency of heavy episodic drinking (i.e. consumption of six standard drinks or more on a single occasion - in South Africa a standard drink is 12 g alcohol) [28]. Because AUDIT is reported to be less sensitive at identifying risk drinking in women [29], the cut-off points of binge drinking for women were reduced by one unit as compared with men. Gual et al. [30] recommend a cut-off point of ≥ 5 for men and ≥ 4 for women although the false-positive rate was 46.5% among male and 63.3% among female patients when compared with a clinical diagnosis of risky drinking. Cronbach's alpha for the AUDIT-C in this sample was 0.85.

Internalized AIDS stigma

Items were adapted to assess internalized AIDS stigma from a scale developed to measure AIDS related stigma beliefs in general South African populations. We selected seven items from the AIDS-Related Stigma Scale [31] and reframed the wording to represent negative self-perceptions and self-abasement in relation to being a person living with HIV/AIDS. The items focused on self-blame (e.g., "I sometimes feel worthless because I am HIV positive.") and concealment of HIV status from others (e.g., "I hide my HIV status from others."). In this study, we examined responses to each of the four internalized stigma items as individual indicators of internalized AIDS stigma and we computed a scale by summing all items endorsed in the direction of greater internalized stigma. Items were responded to from 1 = strongly agree to 4 = strongly disagree. Strongly agree and agree were converted to "1" and strongly disagree and disagree to "0"; scale scores represent the sum total of endorsed items, range 0-7. Cronbach's alpha for this stigma index was 0.64 for this sample.

HIV/AIDS discrimination experiences

To assess AIDS-related discrimination, we asked participants if they had experienced seven discrimination-related events, e.g., whether they had been treated differently since they had disclosed their HIV status to friends and family; whether being HIV positive had caused them to lose a job or a place to stay; and whether they had experienced discrimination because they are HIV positive. Response options were "yes" or "no". Cronbach's alpha for this sample was 0.54.

Social support

Three items were drawn from the Social Support Questionnaire to assess perceived social support [32]. The items were selected to reflect perceived tangible and emotional support: If I were sick and needed someone to take me to a doctor I would have trouble finding someone (reversed); I feel that there is no one I can share my most private concerns and fears (reversed); and I feel a strong emotional bond with at least one other person. These items were responded to on 4-point scales, 1 = completely true, to 4 = completely false, and summed to a score with a range of 3-12. Cronbach's alpha for this sample was .83.

We assessed depressive symptoms using the 10-item version of the Centers for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D) [33]. The CES-D has been widely used in studies of the relationship between HIV and depression [34]. Cronbach's alpha for this sample was 0.54.

Adherence assessment

ARV treatment adherence was assessed by two self-reported adherence measures - the Adult AIDS Clinical Trials Group (AACTG) adherence instrument and the 30-day visual analog scale (VAS). The AACTG consists of nine questions that assess adherence from the previous 1-4 days, within the past week, prior to the interview. The instrument also assesses reasons for non-adherence [35]. The 30-day visual analog scale (VAS) provided an overall adherence assessment for a longer time interval (one month). Both have been validated in resource-limited settings [36, 37]. Adherence is calculated as the % of doses taken over those prescribed. Adherence levels assessed from the VAS are defined as follows: full adherence = 100%, partial adherence >/= 95% and < 100%, and non-adherence as < 95% of prescribed doses taken since the last refill.

Dose adherence was assessed by asking participants to report on how many days they had missed taking all their doses during the past 4 days. Dose non-adherence was defined as having missed all doses on at least one day during the past 4 days.

Adherence to scheduling was measured by the question "Most anti-HIV medications need to be taken on a schedule, such as '2 times a day' or '3 times a day' or 'every 8 hours.' The participants were asked to report how closely they followed their specific schedule over the last 4 days using a 5-point Likert scale, ranging from "never" to "all the time." Schedule non-adherence was defined as having missed scheduling in the past 4 days. Adherence to dietary instructions was measured by first asking "Do any of your anti-HIV medications have special food instructions, such as 'take with food' or 'on an empty stomach' or 'with plenty of fluids'?" If the response was "yes," participants were asked to rate how often they had followed dietary instructions over the last 4 days using a 5-point Likert scale, ranging from never" to "all the time." Schedule non-adherence was defined as having missed scheduling in the past 4 days. Food non-adherence was defined as not having followed special instructions over the last 4 days.

The LifeWindows Information-Motivation-Behavioural Skills ART adherence questionnaire (LW-IMB-AAQ) [38, 39]. Each LW-IMB-AAQ item represents a barrier primarily falling within the I (Information), M (Motivation), or B (Behavioural Skills) constructs. Adherence information was assessed with five items (α .69). Example for an information item: "I know what to do if I miss a dose of any of my HIV medications (for example, whether or not to take the pill(s) late)." Responses to items include "yes," "no," or "don't know" ("don't know" responses were keyed as incorrect responses). Adherence motivation was assessed with ten items (α .78). A "motivation" sample item: "I am worried that other people might realize that I am HIV+ if they see me taking my HIV medications." Response options were 1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree. Behavioural skills were assessed with 14 items (α .73). An example of a behavioural skills item: "How hard or easy is it for you to stay informed about HIV treatment?" Response options were 1 = cannot do at all to 5 = certain you can do.

Data analysis

Data were analyzed using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) for Windows software application programme version 17.0. Frequencies, means, standard deviations, median, interquartile range, were calculated to describe the sample. Uni- and bi-variate analyses and, multiple logistic regressions were used to investigate associations between the outcomes ART adherence and socioeconomic variables, health related variables, and behavioural variables as well as information-mativation-behavioural skills model variables. Associations were considered significant at P < 0.05. Separate multivariable logistic regression analyses were conducted for socio-demographic variables, health related variables and behavioural variables (moderating factors) and information-mativation-behavioural skills model variables and ART adherence. All variables statistically significant at the P < .01 level in bivariate analyses were included in the multivariate model. No significant interactions were found between socioeconomic variables, health related variables, behavioural variables and information-mativation-behavioural skills model variables.

Results

Sample characteristics

Of 735 patients (29.8% male and 70.2% female) who completed assessments prior to initiation of ARVs, 525 were able to complete the assessment at six months follow-up. Of the original cohort, 75 had died, 57 had been transferred, 54 could not be traced, 23 refused the interview and 1 interview was incomplete. At six months following proposed ARV initiation, 519 patients started therapy and six failed to start treatment. Over the six month period 24 patients (4.6%) had temporarily suspended ARVs because of side effects, and three (0.6%) had changed their ARVs. HIV medications for 411 (79.2%) patients included Lamivudine (3TC), Stavudine (d4T) + Efavirenz (Stocrin) and for 108 (20.8%) Lamivudine (3TC), Stavudine (d4T) + Nevirapine. Fixed dose combination of ARVs was not available for patients on this programme during the time of the study.

Nearly three-quarters (73.5%) of the 519 patients who had initiated ARVs in this sample were female, 62.2% of whom were between 30 and 49 years old. Nearly three-quarters (73.3%) were never married, 61.9% had Grade 8 or higher formal education, almost all (98.8%) were Zulu and the largest religious affiliation was charismatic churches (38.5%). The majority of the sample (61.7%) lived in rural areas and was unemployed (59.6%). Only 31.7% of respondents had a formal salary as their main source of household income and 52.5% was in receipt of a disability grant. Those who were followed up at six months (n = 525) were compared to those who could not be followed up (n = 210) on sex, age, formal education, urban or rural residence, HIV symptoms, CD4 cell count and in recept of a disability grant. We found that those who could not be followed up were more likely to be male (χ2 = 8.13, P = .004) and had a lower CD4 cell count (t = -2.55, p = .011) (v. Table 1).
Table 1

Sample characteristics

Variable

N = 519

%

Sex

  

   Male

139

26.6

   Female

370

73.4

Age in years

136

26.3

   18-29

222

42.9

   30-39

100

19.3

   40-49

59

11.4

   50 and above

  

Marital status

  

   Never married

379

73.3

   Currently married

68

13.2

   Cohabitating

40

7.7

   Divorced/separated

11

2.2

   Widowed

19

3.7

Highest education

  

   None

40

7.7

   Up to Grade 7

157

30.4

   Grade 8-11

221

42.7

   Grade 12 or more

99

19.1

Ethnicity

  

   Zulu

513

98.8

   Other

6

1.2

Religious affiliation

  

   African/traditional

52

10.0

   Christian (Protestant churches)

73

14.1

   Christian (Catholic)

49

9.4

   Apostolic

48

9.2

   Zion Christian Church

152

29.3

   Other

71

14.0

   No religion

74

14.3

Residence

  

   Rural village

221

42.7

   Informal settlements (slums)

31

6.0

   Urban/metropolitan areas

49

9.5

   Township

118

22.8

   Farm

98

19.0

Employment situation

  

   Housewife, home maker

76

15.0

   Unemployed

303

59.6

   Employed

115

22.6

   Pensioner, student, disabled

21

4.2

Main source of household income

  

   Formal salary

162

31.7

   Contribution by family members

86

16.9

   Government grant

113

22.1

   Grants/donations by private welfare organizations

80

15.7

   No income (other than social grant)

38

7.4

   Other

32

6.3

Disability grant ("for HIV/AIDS")

  

   Yes

268

52.5

   No

242

47.5

Health characteristics

Most patients (75.2%) had been diagnosed with HIV in the year prior to study recruitment. The median CD4 count at follow-up was 130 cells/cu.mm compared to 119 cells/cu.mm prior to ARV initiation. The mean number of HIV symptoms reported at follow-up was 1.21, 6.6% of patients were receiving TB treatment, 10.3% had at least one hospital admission in the past six months, and 25.6% had seen an ARV treatment buddy at least once in the past six months. Patients with an identified adherence problem are referred to a treatment buddy (v. Table 2).
Table 2

Health and behavioral characteristics

Variable

N = 519

%

Time since HIV diagnosis

  

   2007/8

379

75.2

   2006-1995

125

24.8

CD4 count (cells/uL) = Median = 130 (IQR = 72-185) (at baseline: Median = 119; IQR = 59-163)

  

   1-99

188

37.2

   100-200

232

45.9

   >200

85

16.8

Number of HIV symptoms (range 0-20) M(SD)

1.21 (2.60)

Overall Quality of Life (range 1-5) M(SD)

4.3 (0.7)

General health perceptions (range 1-5) M(SD)

4.4(0.7)

Depression score (range 10-40) M(SD)

17.3(3.3)

Receiving TB treatment

34

6.6

Hospital admission in the past 6 months

53

10.3

Participated in support group in the past 6 months

14

2.7

Seen someone for counseling/support in the past 6 months

123

23.8

Seen an ARV treatment buddy in the past 6 months

132*

25.6

Had alcohol in the past month

13

2.5

AUDIT-C 4 or more

10

1.9

Stigma score (range 0-7) M(SD)

2.8 (1.8)

Discrimination experience score (range 0-5) M(SD)

0.87 (1.11)

Social support score (range 3-12) M(SD)

8.3 (2.3)

*Of those who saw a treatment buddy, 93% saw a buddy only once in the past 6 months

ART adherence

Using the 30-day visual analog scale (VAS) 427 patients (82.9%) were 95% adherent in the month prior to the survey. Results from the AACTG adherence instrument found that on the 4-day recall dose adherence, 15.5% of patients were non-adherent (having missed at least one full day of medication in the past four days). 70.8% of patients were adherent to all parameters (dose, schedule and food). Pearson correlation among the two adherence outcome measures (VAS and AACTG) using categorical cutoffs to define adherence indicated a moderate level of association (r = .56, P < .001). From those found non-adherent on the VAS (17.1%) 85.2% were also found to be non-adherent on the AACTG measure (v. Table 3).
Table 3

ART adherence

  

n

%

30-day VAS at 95%

Adherent

427

82.9

 

Non-adherent

88

17.1

Self-reported 4-day recall dose adherence

Adherent

435

84.5

 

Non-adherent

80

15.5

Self-reported time adherence

Adherent

372

72.4

 

Non-adherent

142

27.6

Self-reported food adherence

Adherent

369

71.7

 

Non-adherent

146

28.3

Adherence to all (Dose, Schedule and Food)

Adherent

364

70.8

 

Non-adherent

150

29.2

Determinants of ART adherence

Both the VAS and the dose, schedule and food adherence indicator found levels of adherence amongst urban residents to be almost 3 times greater than that of rural residents. The VAS indicator found greater adherence amongst those with lower levels of education and amongst single, separated, divorced or widowed groups compared to those married and cohabiting (v. Table 4).
Table 4

Association between socioeconomic variables and ART adherence

 

VAS adherence (≥ 95%)

Dose, schedule and food adherence

 

N = 519 (%)

Crude OR

(95% CI)

P

Crude OR

(95% CI)

P

Sex

     

Female

370 (26.6)

1.00

 

1.00

 

Male

139 (73.4)

1.08 (0.54-1.56)

.747

1.03 (0.63-1.50)

.887

Age

 

0.99 (0.97-1.02)

.673

1.01 (0.99-1.03)

.615

Formal education

     

lower (up to Grade 7)

197 (38.1)

1.00

 

1.00

 

higher (Grade 8 or more)

320 (61.9)

0.89 (0.81-1.00)

.050

0.99 (0.91-1.08)

.895

Marital status

     

Married/cohabitating

108 (20.9)

1.00

 

1.00

 

Single/separated/divorced/widowed

409 (79.2)

1.79 (1.02-3.00)

.028

0.99 (0.62-1.59)

.974

Employment status

     

Unemployed

393 (77.4)

1.00

 

1.00

 

Employed

115 (22.6)

1.00 (0.58-1.74)

.991

1.23 (0.77-1.97)

.386

On disability grant ("for AIDS")

     

No

242 (47.5)

1.00

 

1.00

 

Yes

268 (52.5)

1.09 (0.69-1.72)

.722

0.91 (0.62-1.34)

.642

Residence

     

Rural

319 (61.7)

1.00

 

1.00

 

Urbanct

198 (38.3)

2.78 (1.60-4.83)

.000

3.34 (2.13-5.25)

.000

After adjusting for health-related variables, for both indicators adherence was lower amongst those with higher depression scores and for those with low scores in the Environment domain (safety/healthy physical environment/enough money/access to information/opportunity for leisure activities/transport/access to health services). The dose, schedule and food adherence indicator found adherence to be 3.3 times greater amongst patients with a CD4 count above 200 cells/uL, 4.6 times greater among patients with the 3TC, d4T + Nevirapine regimen and higher overall quality of life. The VAS adherence indicator found higher adherence amongst patients with lower scores in the Spirituality/religion/personal beliefs domain, with higher general health perception scores and with higher scores in social relationships domain (v. Table 5).
Table 5

Association between health-related variables and ART adherence

  

VAS adherence (≥ 95%)

Dose, schedule and food adherence

 

N (%)

519

Crude OR

(95% CI)

P

Adjusted ORa, b

(95% CI)

P

Crude OR

(95% CI)

P

Adjusted ORa, c

(95% CI)

P

Time since diagnosis

         

2006-1995

125 (24.8)

1.00

   

1.00

   

2007/8

379 (75.2)

0.49 (0.26-0.92)

.026

...

 

0.80 (0.50-1.26)

.330

---

 

Hospital admission in the past 6 months

         

No

463 (89.7)

1.00

   

1.00

   

Yes

53 (10.3)

1.51 (0.62-3.69)

.326

...

 

0.98 (0.51-1.85)

.937

---

 

CD4 count

         

≤ 200

420 (83.2)

1.00

 

...

 

1.00

 

1.00

 

>200

85 (16.8)

1.19 (0.63-2.26)

.599

  

2.90 (1.52-5.53)

.001

3.32 (1.18-9.38)

.023

HIV symptoms (range 0-20)

         

M (SD)

1.2 (2.6)

1.08 (0.96-1.21)

.213

...

 

1.06 (0.97-1.15)

.199

---

 

Overall Quality of Life d

         

M (SD)

4.3 (0.7)

2.87 (2.00-4.10)

.000

0.94 (0.52-1.68)

.830

3.91 (2.71-5.65)

.000

2.06 (1.07-3.98)

.031

General health perceptionsd

         

M (SD)

4.4 (0.7)

2.69 (1.95-3.73)

.000

1.72 (1.01-2.95)

.047

3.72 (2.62-5.28)

.000

1.57 (0.89-2.79)

.121

WHOQOL-HIV BREFscores

         

Physical domaine

15.6 (2.7)

1.35 (1.22-1.49)

.000

0.94 (0.78-1.13)

.512

1.54 (1.40-1.69)

.000

0.87 (0.70-1.08)

.201

Psychological domaine

14.6 (3.2)

1.40 (1.28-1.53)

.000

1.17 (0.97-1.41)

.099

1.65 (1.50-1.81)

.000

1.00 (0.81-1.23)

.970

Level of independence domaine

14.5 (1.9)

1.42 (1.29-1.56)

.080

...

 

1.10 (0.98-1.24)

.103

...

 

Social relationships domaine

13.4 (2.6)

1.52 (1.37-1.69)

.000

1.14 (1.00-1.30)

.048

1.65 (1.49-1.83)

.000

1.05 (0.89-1.24)

.549

Environment domaine

13.9 (2.6)

1.76 (1.56-2.00)

.000

1.56 (1.28-1.89)

.000

2.46 (2.11-2.87)

.000

2.21 (1.71-2.86)

.000

Spirituality/religion/personal beliefs domaine

15.3 (2.9)

1.17 (1.08-1.27)

.000

0.76 (0.63-0.91)

.003

1.40 (1.29-1.51)

.000

1.06 (0.89-1.28)

.507

Depression score (higher score = more depressed)

17.3 (3.3)

0.78 (0.72-0.84)

.000

0.88 (0.80-0.96)

.006

0.63 (0.58-0.69)

.000

0.71 (0.62-0.80)

.000

ART regimen

         

3TC, d4T + Efavirenz

411 (79.2)

1.00

 

1.00

 

1.00

 

1.00

 

3TC, d4T + Nevirapine

108 (20.8)

4.08 (1.73-9.63)

.001

2.16 (0.80-5.87)

.130

5.25 (2.57-10.72)

.000

4.61 (1.48-14.34)

.008

aUsing block entry;bHosmer and Lemeshow Chi-square = 11.67, df = 8, p = .166; bCox & Snell R2 .26; b Nagelkerke R2 .42;

cHosmer and Lemeshow Chisquare = 25.05, df = 8, p.002; cCox & Snell R2 .54; c Nagelkerke R2 .76

d Mean scores range from 1 to 5, with 5 indicating the highest, most positive perceptions of quality of life or general health perceptions.

e Overall domain scores range from 4 to 20, with 20 indicating the highest, most positive perceptions.

Table 6 presents crude and adjusted odds ratios for adherence when taking into account different behavioural variables (moderating) factors and information-motivation-behavioural skills model variables. For both adherence indicators, discrimination experiences were associated with lower adherence, and higher scores in adherence information and behavioural skills were associated with higher adherence. For the VAS adherence indicator, higher social support scores were associated with higher adherence. For the dose, schedule and food adherence indicator, using herbal medicines for HIV was associated with lower adherence (v. Table 6).
Table 6

Association between behavioural variables (moderating factors), information-motivation-behavioural skills model and ART adherence

  

VAS adherence (≥ 95%)

Dose, schedule and food adherence

Behavioural variables (moderating factors)

N (%)

519

Crude OR

(95% CI)

P

Adjusted ORa, b

(95% CI)

P

Crude OR

(95% CI)

P

Adjusted ORa, c

(95% CI)

P

TCAM use for HIV

         

No

375 (72.0)

1.00

 

1.00

 

1.00

   

Yes

144 (28.0)

0.41 (0.28-0.66)

.000

0.62 (0.29-1.34)

.226

0.66 (0.43-1.00)

.049

...

 

Herbal use for HIV

         

No

476 (92.0)

1.00

 

1.00

 

1.00

 

1.00

 

Yes

43 (8.0)

0.13 (0.07-0.26)

.000

0.70 (0.21-1.61)

.296

0.04 (0.02-0.12)

.000

0.12 (0.03-0.51)

.004

Past month alcohol use

         

No

509 (97.5)

1.00

 

1.00

 

1.00

   

Yes

13 (2.5)

0.08 (0.03-0.28)

.000

0.47 (0.04-5.84)

.556

0.03 (0.00-0.25)

.001

...

 

AUDIT-C 4 or more

         

No

506 (98.1)

1.00

 

1.00

 

1.00

   

Yes

10 (1.9)

0.08 (0.02-0.33)

.000

0.76 (0.04-13.48)

.851

0.04 (0.01-0.35)

.003

...

 

Discrimination experiences score (higher score= higher level of discrimination)

 

0.44 (0.36-0.54)

.000

0.60 (0.46-0.78)

.000

0.20 (0.15-0.27)

.000

0.28 (0.19-0.41)

.000

Stigma score (higher score= higher stigma)

 

1.11 (0.97-1.27)

.141

...

 

0.98 (0.88-1.09)

.717

...

 

Social support score (higher score = higher support

 

1.26 (1.13-1.40)

.000

1.20 (1.00-1.45)

.046

1.17 (1.08-1.28)

.000

0.97 (0.81-1.17)

.769

Information-motivation-behavioural skills model

         

IMB adherence information (higher score = higher adherence information)

 

1.42 (1.31-1.55)

.000

1.11 (1.01-1.22)

.032

1.55 (1.43-1.69)

.000

1.26 (1.12-1.43)

.000

IMB adherence motivation (higher score = higher adherence motivation)

 

1.13 (1.08-1.17)

.000

1.03 (0.97-1.10)

.333

1.14 (1.10-1.18)

.000

1.02 (0.96-1.10)

.482

IMB behavioral skills (higher score = higher behavioural skills)

 

1.21 (1.16-1.26)

.000

1.07 (1.01-1.14)

.023

1.34 (1.28-1.41)

.000

1.14 (1.07-1.21)

.000

a Using block entry; bHosmer and Lemeshow Chi-square = 4.93, df = 8, p = .7.65; bCox & Snell R2 .25; b Nagelkerke R2 .41;

cHosmer and Lemeshow Chisquare = 13.26, df = 8, p.103; cCox & Snell R2 .52; c Nagelkerke R2 .74

Discussion

A good proportion of patients were found to be adherent using both adherence instruments (VAS 82.9%; AATCG 70.8%). These good figures are similar to that of 77% found for African patients the meta-analysis by Mills and colleagues [40]. Such good rates may however decline the longer patients are on treatment. Kalichman et al. [41] found that the VAS yielded adherence rates that paralleled unannounced pill counts and differed from AATCG recall suggesting that the VAS offers a valid method of assessing medication adherence. However, the combined dose, schedule and food adherence indicator of the AATCG may be useful in identifying schedule and food adherence, and found in this study different adherence rates and influencing factors as compared to the VAS. For example, lower dose, schedule and food adherence was found for patients on 3TC, d4T + Efavirenz regimen and those who were taking herbal medicine for HIV.

Important socio-economic predictors of ART adherence in this South African sample include urban area of residence and adequate physical environment including transport and access to health services. Living in an urban area is likely to be associated with lower transport costs and fewer disruptions in access to medications, which other studies have found to be a facilitators of adherence [11, 18, 20].

For health-related variables in this sample, lower depression scores were significantly associated with higher adherence for both adherence indicators. Other studies have similarly found that psychological health [11, 20] is an important facilitator of adherence. Patients who had a CD4 count greater than 200 cells/uL, higher environment domain scores and better general health perception and overall quality of life scores reported higher adherence at their 6 month follow up. In a recent South African study, Wouters, Van Dammeb and Van Loon [42] found that baseline health (CD4 count) significantly influenced treatment outcomes during the first 6 months of ART. Patients with higher CD4 counts and better perceptions of their health are likely to have witnessed greater improvements in their health as a result of commencing ART. As Mills and colleagues meta-analysis indicates, this is likely to facilitate adherence.

Whilst the use of prayer predicted higher adherence in a Zambian study [20], the use of prayer was not associated with levels of adherence in the present study and was therefore excluded from analysis. The 'spirituality/religion/personal beliefs' domain contains items about whether the respondent considers their life to be meaningful, to what extent they are bothered about others blaming them for their illness, whether they fear for the future or worry about death and dying because of HIV. Higher scores (more positive attitudes about life and fewer worries about dying) in this domain were associated with lower adherence. These patients may have a lower perceived need for ART than other patients.

Behavioural variables associated with greater adherence include, high scores for IMB adherence information and behavioural skills and not using herbal medicines. Having greater knowledge about HIV and ARVs and greater HIV treatment behavioural skills and not using herbal medicines are known facilitators of adherence and confirm the IMB mdel [1720, 40]. Equally, higher social support scores and experiencing less discrimination were predictors of higher adherence in this study. Further research is needed to identify risk factors and to improve retention thorugh the use of social networks or emerging technologies for patients at risk for poor adherence [43].

Limitations

This study also has limitations. For more than 95% of the patients studied viral loads were not available from medical records; they had not been done. So an important outcome of ART and ART adherence viral suppression could not be assessed. The patients who died or were lost to follow-up in the first 6 months were not included in the present study (selection bias). Some factors such as food insecurity, transportation barriers, and structural barriers of ARV adherence were not assessed [40]. Further, the assessment of ART adherence and other measures relied on self-report. However, there is increasing evidence indicating that adherence is reliably reported [41, 44]. Caution is also urged in generalizing findings to other districts and provinces in the country. Investigation of factors related with long-term adherence would require longer follow-up than the current study.

Conclusions

The adherence rate found in this study seems to be good. The use of two different adherence indicators was important for reducing bias through self-reporting and therefore enabling a greater potential range of determinants to be identified. Given the sample size and the large number of potential determinants of adherence in this study, variables were analysed in parsimonious subsets rather than one model. For the patients in this study, particularly those not living in urban areas, additional support may be needed to ensure patients are able to attend appointments or obtain their medications more easily. Adherence information and behavioural skills as part of the IMB model should be strengthened to improve adherence. Further psychological support is also required and patients' perceived need for ARTs should be routinely assessed. Although caution is urged in generalizing findings to other districts and provinces in the country, the results generally support the findings from other adherence studies in southern Africa.

Declarations

Acknowledgements

We thank the TIBOTEC REACH initiative for funding this study.

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Health Systems Research Unit, Social Aspect of HIV/AIDS and Health, Human Sciences Research Council
(2)
Department of Psychology, University of the Free State
(3)
Centre for Population Studies, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine
(4)
Centre for the study of Sexual Health and HIV, Homerton University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust

References

  1. Kredo T, Walt Van der J, Siegfried N, Cohen K: Therapeutic drug monitoring of antiretrovirals for people with HIV. Cochrane Database Systematic Review. 2009, 8 (3): CD007268-Google Scholar
  2. Kuhn L, Semrau K, Ramachandran S, Sinkala M, Scott N, Kasonde P, Mwiya M, Kankasa C, Decker D, Thea D, Aldrovandi G: Mortality and virologic outcomes after access to antiretroviral therapy among a cohort of HIV-infected women who received single-dose nevirapine in Lusaka, Zambia. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2009, 52 (1): 132-136. 10.1097/QAI.0b013e3181ab6d5e.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  3. Lohse N, Hansen A, Gerstoft J, Obel N: Improved survival in HIV-infected persons: consequences and perspectives. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2007, 60 (3): 461-463. 10.1093/jac/dkm241.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Pallela F, Delaney K, Moorman A, Loveless M, Fuhrer J, Satten GA, Aschman DJ, Holmberg SD: Declining morbidity and mortality among patients with advanced human immunodeficiency virus infection. N Engl J Med. 1998, 338 (13): 853-860. 10.1056/NEJM199803263381301.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  5. Vergidis P, Falagas M, Hamer D: Meta-analytical studies on the epidemiology, prevention, and treatment of human immunodeficiency virus infection. Infect Dis Clin North Am. 2009, 23 (2): 295-308. 10.1016/j.idc.2009.01.013.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Lima V, Harrigan R, Murray M, Moore D, Wood E, Hogg R, Montaner J: Differential impact of adherence on long-term treatment response among naive HIV-infected individuals. AIDS. 2008, 22: 2371-2380. 10.1097/QAD.0b013e328315cdd3.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Bangsberg D: Less than 95% adherence to nonnucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitor therapy can lead to viralsuppression. Clin Infec Dis. 2006, 43 (7): 939-41. 10.1086/507526.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  8. Shuter J, Sarlo J, Kanmaz T, Rode R, Zingman B: HIV-infected patients receiving lopinavir/ritonavir-based antiretroviral therapy achieve high rates of virologic suppression despite adherence rates less than 95%. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2007, 45 (1): 4-8. 10.1097/QAI.0b013e318050d8c2.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Knafl G, Bova C, Fennie K, O'Malley J, Dieckhaus K, Williams A: An analysis of electronically monitored adherence to antiretroviral medications. AIDS Behav. 2008, 10.1007/s10461-008-9512-z.Google Scholar
  10. Mills E, Nachega J, Bangsberg D, Singh S, Rachlis B, Wu P, Wilson K, Buchan I, Gill C, Cooper C: Adherence to HAART: a systematic review of developed and developing nation patient-reported barriers and facilitators. PLoS Med. 2006, 3 (11): e438-10.1371/journal.pmed.0030438.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  11. Berg K, Demas P, Howard A, Schoenbaum E, Gourevitch M, Arnsten J: Gender differences in factors associated with adherence to antiretroviral therapy. J Gen Intern Med. 2004, 19 (11): 1111-1117. 10.1111/j.1525-1497.2004.30445.x.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  12. Kempf M, Pisu M, Dumcheva A, Westfall A, Md J, Saag M: Gender differences in discontinuation of antiretroviral treatment regimens. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2009.Google Scholar
  13. Holzemer WL, Uys L: Managing AIDS Stigma. SAHARA J. 2004, 1 (3): 165-174.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Sayles J, Wong M, Kinsler J, Martins D, Cunningham W: The association of stigma with self-reported access to medical care and antiretroviral therapy adherence in persons living with HIV/AIDS. J GenIntern Med. 2009.Google Scholar
  15. Skinner D, Mfecane S: Stigma, discrimination and the implications for people living with HIV/AIDS in South Africa. SAHARA J. 2004, 1 (3): 157-164.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Birbeck G, Chomba E, Kvalsund M, Bradbury R, Mang'ombe C, Malama K, Kaile T, Byers P, Organek N, RAAZ Study Team: Antiretroviral adherence in rural Zambia: the first year of treatment availability. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2009, 80 (4): 669-674.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Dahab M, Charalambous S, Hamilton R, Fielding K, Kielmann K, Churchyard G, Grant A: That is why I stopped the ART": patients' & providers' perspectives on barriers to and enablers of HIV treatment adherence in a South African workplace programme. BMC Public Health. 2008, 8: 63-10.1186/1471-2458-8-63.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  18. Kip E, Ehlers V, Wal van der D: Patients' adherence to antiretroviral therapy in Botswana. J Nurs Scholarsh. 2009, 41 (2): 149-157. 10.1111/j.1547-5069.2009.01266.x.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Murray L, Semrau K, McCurley E, Thea D, Scott N, Mwiya M, Kankasa C, Bass J, Bolton P: Barriers to acceptance and adherence of antiretroviral therapy in urban Zambian women: a qualitative study. AIDS Care. 2009, 21 (1): 78-86. 10.1080/09540120802032643.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  20. Sanjobo N, Frich J, Fretheim A: Barriers and facilitators to patients' adherence to antiretroviral treatment in Zambia: a qualitative study. SAHARA J. 2008, 5 (3): 136-143.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Munro S, Lewin S, Swart T, Volmink J: A review of health behaviour theories: how useful are these for developing interventions to promote long-term medication adherence for TB and HIV/AIDS?. BMC Public Health. 2007, 11 (7): 104-10.1186/1471-2458-7-104.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  22. Fisher JD, Fisher WA, Amico KR, Harman JJ: An information-motivation-behavioral skills model of adherence to antiretroviral therapy. Health Psychology. 2006, 25 (4): 462-473. 10.1037/0278-6133.25.4.462.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. KwaZulu-Natal Department of Health: Uthukela (DC 23) district. 2009, [http://www.kznhealth.gov.za/uthukela.htm]Google Scholar
  24. Peltzer K, Friend-du Preez N, Ramlagan S, Fomundam H: Use of traditional, complementary and alternative medicine (TCAM) for HIV patients in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. BMC Public Health. 2008, 24,8 (1): 255-10.1186/1471-2458-8-255.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  25. Holzemer WL, Hudson A, Kirksey KM, Hamilton MJ, Bakken S: The revised Sign and Symptom Check-list for HIV (SSC-HIVrev). J Assoc Nurses AIDS Care. 2001, 12 (5): 60-70. 10.1016/S1055-3290(06)60263-X.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. O'Connell K, Saxena S, Skevington SM, WHOQOL HIV Group: WHOQOL-HIV for quality of life assessment among people living with HIV and AIDS: Results from a field test. AIDS Care. 2004, 16 (7): 882-889. 10.1080/09540120412331290194.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  27. WHOQOL (World Health Organization's Quality of Life HIV Instrument HIV Group: Initial steps to developing the World Health Organization's Quality of Life Instrument (WHOQOL) module for international assessment in HIV/AIDS. AIDS Care. 2003, 15 (3): 347-357. 10.1080/0954012031000105405.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  28. Babor TF, Higgens-Biddle JC, Saunders JB, Monteiro MG: AUDIT: The Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test. Guidelines for use in primary care. 2001, Geneva: World Health Organization, Department of Mental Health and Substance Dependence. WHO/MSD/MSB/01.6aGoogle Scholar
  29. Freeborn DK, Polen RP, Hollis JF, Senft RA: Screening and brief intervention for hazardous drinking in an HMO: effects on medical care utilization. J Behavioral Health Serv Res. 2000, 27: 446-453. 10.1007/BF02287826.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  30. Gual A, Segura L, Contel M, Heather N, Colom J: AUDIT-3 and AUDIT-4: Effectiveness of two short forms of the alcohol use disorders identification test. Alcohol Alcohol. 2002, 37 (6): 561-596.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  31. Kalichman SC, Simbayi L, Jooste S, Toefy Y, Cain D, Cherry C: Development of a brief scale to measure AIDS-related stigmas in South Africa. AIDS Behav. 2005, 9: 135-143. 10.1007/s10461-005-3895-x.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Brock D, Sarason I, Sarason B, Pierce G: Simultaneous assessment of perceived global and relationship-specific support. J Soc Pers Relat. 1996, 13: 143-152. 10.1177/0265407596131008.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  33. Andresen E, Malmgren J, Carter W, Patrick D: 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.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Kilbourne A, Justice A, Rollman B, McGinnis K, Rabeneck L, Weissman S, Smola S, Schultz R, Whittle J, Rodriguez-Barradas M: Clinical importance of HIV and depressive symptoms among veterans with HIV infection. J Gen Intern Med. 2002, 17 (7): 512-520. 10.1046/j.1525-1497.2002.10803.x.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  35. Chesney MA, Ickovics JR, Chambers DB, Gifford AL, Neidig J, Zwickl B, Wu AW: Self-reported adherence to antiretroviral medications among participants in HIV clinical trials: the AACTG adherence instruments. Patient Care Committee & Adherence Working Group of the Outcomes Committee of the Adult AIDS Clinical Trials Group (AACTG). AIDS Care. 2000, 12 (3): 255-266. 10.1080/09540120050042891.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Maneesriwongul WL, Tulathong S, Fennie KP, Williams AB: Adherence to antiretroviral medication among HIV-positive patients in Thailand. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2006, 43 (1): S119-S122. 10.1097/01.qai.0000248346.79888.78.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Sarna A, Luchters S, Geibel P, Munyao S, Kaai K, Shikely K: Promoting adherence to antiretroviral therapy through a directly administered antiretroviral therapy (DAART) strategy in Mombasa, Kenya. 2005, Nairobi: Population CouncilGoogle Scholar
  38. Fisher JD, Fisher WA, Amico KR, Harman JJ: An information-motivation-behavioral skills model of adherence to antiretroviral therapy. Health Psychol. 2006, 25: 462-473. 10.1037/0278-6133.25.4.462.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. The LifeWindows Project Team: The LifeWindows information-motivation-behavioral skills ART adherence questionnaire. 2006, Connecticut, Center for Health, Intervention and PreventionGoogle Scholar
  40. Mills E, Nachega J, Buchan I, Orbinski J, Attaran A, Singh S, Rachlis B, Wu P, Cooper C, Thabane L, Wilson K, Guyatt G, Bangsberg D: Adherence to antiretroviral therapy in sub-Saharan Africa and North America: a meta-analysis. JAMA. 2006, 296 (6): 679-90. 10.1001/jama.296.6.679.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Wouters E, Van Dammeb W, Van Loon F: Public-sector ART in the Free State Province, South Africa: Community support as an important determinant of outcome. Soc Sci Med. 2009Google Scholar
  42. Kalichman SC, Amaral CM, Swetzes C, Jones M, Macy R, Kalichman MO, Cherry C: A simple single-item rating scale to measure medication adherence: further evidence for convergent validity. J Int Assoc Physicians AIDS Care (Chic Ill). 2009, 8 (6): 367-74. 10.1177/1545109709352884.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  43. Nachega JB, Mills EJ, Schechter M: Antiretroviral therapy adherence and retention in care in middle-income and low-income countries: current status of knowledge and research priorities. Curr Opin HIV AIDS. 2010, 5 (1): 70-7. 10.1097/COH.0b013e328333ad61.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Simoni JM, Kurth AE, Pearson CR, Pantalone DW, Merrill JO, Frick PA: Self-report measures of antiretroviral therapy adherence: a review with recommendations for HIV research and clinical management. AIDS Behav. 2006, 10 (3): 227-45. 10.1007/s10461-006-9078-6.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  45. Pre-publication history

    1. The pre-publication history for this paper can be accessed here:http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2458/10/111/prepub

Copyright

© Peltzer et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2010

This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Advertisement