|
|
||||||||
FIELD ACTION REPORT |
Pamela Brown-Peterside, Evelyn Rivera, Debbie Lucy, Izzie Slaughter, Leigh Ren, and Beryl A. Koblin are with the Laboratory of Epidemiology, New York Blood Center, New York, N.Y. Mary Ann Chiasson was with the New York City Department of Health.
Correspondence: Requests for reprints should be sent to Pamela Brown-Peterside, PhD, Laboratory of Epidemiology, New York Blood Center, 1309 Fulton Avenue, Room 312, Bronx, NY 10456 (e-mail: pbrownpeterside{at}nybc.org).
| ABSTRACT |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Project ACHIEVE, which conducts HIV prevention research studies, maintains a women's site in the South Bronx in New York City. Owing to a focused retention effort at the South Bronx site, high retention rates were achieved in a vaccine preparedness study for women at high risk of HIV infection. Comparable retention rates have been achieved in HIV vaccine trials with similar cohorts of women at this site. These results suggest that concerns about retaining hard-to-reach populations should not cause these populations to be excluded from HIV vaccine and prevention trials.
| INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
From April to September 1998, Project ACHIEVE's South Bronx site (maintained by collaboration between the New York Blood Center and the New York City Department of Health) enrolled 164 HIV-negative women, aged 18 to 60 years, in a vaccine preparedness study as part of a larger multisite study. To qualify as being at high risk of HIV infection, each participant had to meet 1 or more of the following criteria: have a current male sex partner who was HIV infected or an injection drug user, or in the past year have smoked crack, exchanged sex for money or drugs, had 5 or more male sex partners, or had a sexually transmitted disease. Women who reported injection drug use in the past 3 years were excluded. Recruitment strategies included street outreach, newspaper ads, flyers, posters, and tabling in clinics and at health fairs. At enrollment, most of the women were poor; half of them reported 5 or more partners or exchanging sex for money or drugs, and two thirds had smoked crack in the preceding year (Table 1
).
|
| DISCUSSION AND EVALUATION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
At each visit, women were reimbursed for their time ($20), given a $3 Metrocard to cover round-trip public transportation, and offered male and female condoms and small gifts. Appointment scheduling was flexible. Sometimes we saw participants before or after hours or on weekends. For participants who entered residential drug treatment programs, we conducted visits on site whenever possible.
The counseling that women received was part of our approach. It offered them support to cope with the difficulties in their lives and may have helped them keep their appointments. This support took the form of a listening ear; a shoulder to cry on; care packages of toiletries for those without homes; and referrals to social services agencies for assistance with housing, drug treatment, domestic violence, mental health, welfare, and employment.
When participants missed appointments, we made phone calls and sent letters. Home visits were also made by the outreach worker at different times of the daysometimes 3 or 4 timesuntil contact was reestablished or it was clear that a participant had moved. If we could not locate participants, we checked to see if they had been incarcerated or become homeless. Because we were unable to continue doing study visits with incarcerated participants, we knew not to keep looking for them. For those in the homeless shelter system, we retrieved an updated address and reestablished contact.
Retention support for this population requires at least 1 full-time staff member who focuses on retention; financial support for home visits, such as car service (about $25 round-trip); and a computerized tracking system.
| NEXT STEPS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Vaccine preparedness studies mimic clinical trials in terms of visit schedules, educational content, and HIV counseling, but they contain no investigational agent. It is essential to know whether retention rates such as ours can be replicated with women in vaccine trials. We are involved in 2 multisite HIV vaccine trials with cohorts of high-risk women similar to those described here. Our local retention rates for these studies are 100% for a small 2-year phase II trial (n = 6) and 95% after 12 months for a phase III trial (n = 56).
Our findings suggest that high-risk women who are living in poverty can be successfully retained in HIV vaccine trials. Preconceived ideas about retention are no reason to exclude hard-to-reach populations from HIV vaccine or other prevention trials.
| Highlights
|
| Acknowledgments |
|---|
| Footnotes |
|---|
The content of this report does not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the US Department of Health and Human Services, nor does mention of trade names, commercial products, or organizations imply endorsement by the US government.
P. Brown-Peterside conceptualized the report, directed analysis and interpretation, and wrote the manuscript. E. Rivera, D. Lucy, and I. Slaughter conducted the retention efforts and reviewed and edited drafts of the manuscript. L. Ren conducted the data analysis and computed the retention rates. M. A. Chiasson and B. A. Koblin participated in conception and design and reviewed and edited drafts of the manuscript.
Accepted for publication January 5, 2001.
| References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
2. Koblin BA, Heagerty P, Sheon A, et al. Readiness of high-risk populations in the HIV Network for Prevention Trials to participate in HIV vaccine efficacy trials in the United States. AIDS.1998;12:785793.[Medline]
3.
Seage GE III, Metzger D, Holte S, Buchbinder S, Koblin B, Celum C. Feasibility of conducting HIV-1 vaccine trials in the United States: recruitment, retention and HIV-1 seroincidence from the HIV Network for Prevention Trials (HIVNET) Vaccine Preparedness Study (VPS). Am J Epidemiol.2001;153:619 627.
4. Zierler S, Kreiger N. Reframing women's risk: social inequalities and HIV infection. Annu Rev Public Health, 1997;18:401436.[Medline]
5. Brown-Peterside P, Smith C, Affleck P, Doherty-Iddings P, Harrison C, Clark C. Enabling women to participate in HIV vaccine efficacy trials: lessons learned from a US vaccine preparedness study. Poster presented at: 12th World AIDS Conference; June 28July 3, 1998; Geneva.
6. Brown-Peterside P, Chiasson MA, Ren L, Koblin BA. Involving women in HIV vaccine efficacy trials: lessons learned from a vaccine preparedness study in New York City. J Urban Health.2000;77:425437[Medline]
7.
Hunt JR, White E. Retaining and tracking cohort study members. Epidemiol Rev.1998;20:5770.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |