SSM: Population Health (Sep 2023)

The effect of universal testing and treatment for HIV on health-related quality of life – An analysis of data from the HPTN 071 (PopART) cluster randomised trial

  • Katherine Davis,
  • Michael Pickles,
  • Simon Gregson,
  • James R. Hargreaves,
  • Helen Ayles,
  • Peter Bock,
  • Triantafyllos Pliakas,
  • Ranjeeta Thomas,
  • Julius Ohrnberger,
  • Justin Bwalya,
  • Nomtha Bell-Mandla,
  • Kwame Shanaube,
  • William Probert,
  • Graeme Hoddinott,
  • Virginia Bond,
  • Richard Hayes,
  • Sarah Fidler,
  • Katharina Hauck

Journal volume & issue
Vol. 23
p. 101473

Abstract

Read online

Background: HIV treatment has clear Health-Related Quality-of-Life (HRQoL) benefits. However, little is known about how Universal Testing and Treatment (UTT) for HIV affects HRQoL. This study aimed to examine the effect of a combination prevention intervention, including UTT, on HRQoL among People Living with HIV (PLHIV). Methods: Data were from HPTN 071 (PopART), a three-arm cluster randomised controlled trial in 21 communities in Zambia and South Africa (2013–2018). Arm A received the full UTT intervention of door-to-door HIV testing plus access to antiretroviral therapy (ART) regardless of CD4 count, Arm B received the intervention but followed national treatment guidelines (universal ART from 2016), and Arm C received standard care. The intervention effect was measured in a cohort of randomly selected adults, over 36 months. HRQoL scores, and the prevalence of problems in five HRQoL dimensions (mobility, self-care, performing daily activities, pain/discomfort, anxiety/depression) were assessed among all participants using the EuroQol-5-dimensions-5-levels questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L). We compared HRQoL among PLHIV with laboratory confirmed HIV status between arms, using adjusted two-stage cluster-level analyses. Results: At baseline, 7,856 PLHIV provided HRQoL data. At 36 months, the mean HRQoL score was 0.892 (95% confidence interval: 0.887–0.898) in Arm A, 0.886 (0.877–0.894) in Arm B and 0.888 (0.884–0.892) in Arm C. There was no evidence of a difference in HRQoL scores between arms (A vs C, adjusted mean difference: 0.003, -0.001-0.006; B vs C: -0.004, -0.014-0.005). The prevalence of problems with pain/discomfort was lower in Arm A than C (adjusted prevalence ratio: 0.37, 0.14–0.97). There was no evidence of differences for other HRQoL dimensions. Conclusions: The intervention did not change overall HRQoL, suggesting that raising HRQoL among PLHIV might require more than improved testing and treatment. However, PLHIV had fewer problems with pain/discomfort under the full intervention; this benefit of UTT should be maximised during roll-out.

Keywords