Implementation of long‐acting cabotegravir and rilpivirine: primary results from the perspective of staff study participants in the Cabotegravir And Rilpivirine Implementation Study in European Locations

作者：Cassidy A. Gutner, Laurent Hocqueloux, Celia Jonsson‐Oldenbüttel, Linos Vandekerckhove, Berend J. van Welzen, Laurence SLAMA, María José Crusells-Canales, Julián Olalla, Rebecca DeMoor, Jenny Scherzer, Mounir Ait‐Khaled, Gilda Bontempo, Martin Gill, Natasha Patel, Ronald D’Amico, Kai Hove, Bryan Baugh, Nicola Barnes, Monica Hadi, Emma Low, Savita Bakhshi Anand, Alison Hamilton, H Garges, Maggie Czarnogorski · 发表于：Journal of the International AIDS Society · 年份：2024 · DOI：10.1002/jia2.26243 · 被引用次数：12 · 研究领域：Health Policy Implementation Science、HIV/AIDS Research and Interventions、HIV, Drug Use, Sexual Risk

INTRODUCTION: Cabotegravir plus rilpivirine (CAB + RPV) is the first complete long-acting (LA) regimen recommended for maintaining HIV-1 virological suppression. Cabotegravir And Rilpivirine Implementation Study in European Locations (CARISEL) is an implementation-effectiveness study examining the implementation of CAB+RPV LA administered every 2 months (Q2M) in European HIV centres. We present staff study participant (SSP) perspectives on the administration of CAB+RPV LA over 12 months. METHODS: Eighteen clinics were randomized to one of two implementation support packages: standard arm (Arm-S) or enhanced arm (Arm-E). Arm-S included video injection training and provider/patient toolkits. Additionally, Arm-E included skilled wrap-around team meetings, face-to-face injection training and continuous quality improvement (CQI) calls. SSPs completed surveys on the acceptability, appropriateness and feasibility of CAB+RPV LA as an intervention and its implementation into their clinics, as well as barriers and facilitators to implementation. All surveys were completed at Month (M)1 (baseline), M5 and M12; data collection was completed by February 2022. Qualitative data were obtained from semi-structured interviews at M1, M5 and M12. The primary objective was assessed via formal statistical comparisons between study arms of the Acceptability of Implementation Measure, Implementation Appropriateness Measure and Feasibility of Implementation Measure surveys (1-5 Likert scale ranging f...