A systematic review comparing antiretroviral adherence descriptive and intervention studies conducted in the USA.

Sandelowski M, Voils CI, Chang Y, Lee EJ. A systematic review comparing antiretroviral adherence descriptive and intervention studies conducted in the USA. AIDS Care. 2009 Aug 1; 21(8):953-66.

Dimensions for VA is a web-based tool available to VA staff that enables detailed searches of published research and research projects.

If you have VA-Intranet access, click here for more information vaww.hsrd.research.va.gov/dimensions/

VA staff not currently on the VA network can access Dimensions by registering for an account using their VA email address.    Search Dimensions for VA for this citation
* Don't have VA-internal network access or a VA email address? Try searching the free-to-the-public version of Dimensions

Search for Abstract from PubMed

---

Abstract:

We examined the extent to which studies aimed at testing interventions to improve antiretroviral adherence have targeted the facilitators of and barriers known to affect adherence. Of the 88 reports reviewed, 41 were reports of descriptive studies conducted with US HIV-positive women and 47 were reports of intervention studies conducted with US HIV-positive persons. We extracted from the descriptive studies all findings addressing any factor linked to antiretroviral adherence and from the intervention studies, information on the nature of the intervention, the adherence problem targeted, the persons targeted for the intervention, and the intervention outcomes desired. We discerned congruence between the prominence of substance abuse as a factor identified in the descriptive studies as a barrier to adherence and its prominence as the problem most addressed in those reports of intervention studies that specified the problems targeted for intervention. We also discerned congruence between the prominence of family and provider support as factors identified in the descriptive studies as facilitators of adherence and the presence of social support as an intervention component and outcome variable. Less discernible in the reports of intervention studies was specific attention to other factors prominent in the descriptive studies, which may be due to the complex nature of the problem, individualistic and rationalist slant of interventions, or simply the ways interventions were presented. Our review raises issues about niche standardization and intervention tailoring, targeting, and fidelity.