Determinants of sustained viral suppression in HIV-infected patients with self-reported poor adherence to antiretroviral therapy.

BACKGROUND: Good adherence to antiretroviral therapy (ART) is critical for successful HIV treatment. However, some patients remain virologically suppressed despite suboptimal adherence. We hypothesized that this could result from host genetic factors influencing drug levels. METHODS: Eligible individuals were Caucasians treated with efavirenz (EFV) and/or boosted lopinavir (LPV/r) with self-reported poor adherence, defined as missing doses of ART at least weekly for more than 6 months. Participants were genotyped for single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in candidate genes previously reported to decrease EFV (rs3745274, rs35303484, rs35979566 in CYP2B6) and LPV/r clearance (rs4149056 in SLCO1B1, rs6945984 in CYP3A, rs717620 in ABCC2). Viral suppression was defined as having HIV-1 RNA <400 copies/ml throughout the study period. RESULTS: From January 2003 until May 2009, 37 individuals on EFV (28 suppressed and 9 not suppressed) and 69 on LPV/r (38 suppressed and 31 not suppressed) were eligible. The poor adherence period was a median of 32 weeks with 18.9% of EFV and 20.3% of LPV/r patients reporting missed doses on a daily basis. The tested SNPs were not determinant for viral suppression. Reporting missing >1 dose/week was associated with a lower probability of viral suppression compared to missing 1 dose/week (EFV: odds ratio (OR) 0.11, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.01-0.99; LPV/r: OR 0.29, 95% CI: 0.09-0.94). In both groups, the probability of remaining suppressed increased with the duration of continuous suppression prior to the poor adherence period (EFV: OR 3.40, 95% CI: 0.62-18.75; LPV/r: OR 5.65, 95% CI: 1.82-17.56). CONCLUSIONS: The investigated genetic variants did not play a significant role in the sustained viral suppression of individuals with suboptimal adherence. Risk of failure decreased with longer duration of viral suppression in this population.

Self-reported non-adherence to antiretroviral therapy repeatedly assessed by two questions predicts treatment failure in virologically suppressed patients.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to explore the predictive value of longitudinal self-reported adherence data on viral rebound. METHODS: Individuals in the Swiss HIV Cohort Study on combined antiretroviral therapy (cART) with RNA <50 copies/ml over the previous 3 months and who were interviewed about adherence at least once prior to 1 March 2007 were eligible. Adherence was defined in terms of missed doses of cART (0, 1, 2 or >2) in the previous 28 days. Viral rebound was defined as RNA >500 copies/ml. Cox regression models with time-independent and -dependent covariates were used to evaluate time to viral rebound. RESULTS: A total of 2,664 individuals and 15,530 visits were included. Across all visits, missing doses were reported as follows: 1 dose 14.7%, 2 doses 5.1%, >2 doses 3.8% taking <95% of doses 4.5% and missing > or =2 consecutive doses 3.2%. In total, 308 (11.6%) patients experienced viral rebound. After controlling for confounding variables, self-reported non-adherence remained significantly associated with the rate of occurrence of viral rebound (compared with zero missed doses: 1 dose, hazard ratio [HR] 1.03, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.72-1.48; 2 doses, HR 2.17, 95% CI 1.46-3.25; >2 doses, HR 3.66, 95% CI 2.50-5.34). Several variables significantly associated with an increased risk of viral rebound irrespective of adherence were identified: being on a protease inhibitor or triple nucleoside regimen (compared with a non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor), >5 previous cART regimens, seeing a less-experienced physician, taking co-medication, and a shorter time virally suppressed. CONCLUSIONS: A simple self-report adherence questionnaire repeatedly administered provides a sensitive measure of non-adherence that predicts viral rebound.

Association of working conditions with self-reported work-related symptoms: results from the Swiss dataset of the European Working Conditions Survey

Working conditions are important determinants of health. The aims of this article are to 1) identify working conditions and work characteristics that are associated with workers' perceptions that their work is harmful to their health and 2) identify with what symptoms these working conditions are associated.We used the Swiss dataset from the 2005 edition of the European Working Conditions Survey. The dependent variable was based on the question "Does your work affect your health?". Logistic regression was used to identify a set of variables collectively associated with self-reported work-related adverse health effects.A total of 330 (32%) participants reported having their health affected by work. The most frequent symptoms included backache (17.1%), muscular pains (13.1%), stress (18.3%) and overall fatigue (11.7%). Scores for self-reported exposure to physicochemical risks, postural and physical risks, high work demand, and low social support were all significantly associated with workers' perceptions that their work is harmful to their health, regardless of gender or age. A high level of education was associated with stress symptoms, and reports that health was affected by work was associated with low job satisfaction.Many workers believe that their work affects their health. Health specialists should pay attention to the potential association between work and their patients' health complaints. This is particularly relevant when patients mention symptoms such as muscular pains, backache, overall fatigue, and stress. Specific attention should be given to complaints of stress in highly educated workers.

Detecting and measuring deprivation in primary care: development, validity and reliability of a self-reported questionnaire - the DiPCare-Q

Background: General practitioners play a central role in taking deprivation into consideration when caring for patients in primary care. Validated questions to identify deprivation in primary-care practices are still lacking. For both clinical and research purposes, this study therefore aims to develop and validate a standardized instrument measuring both material and social deprivation at an individual level. Methods: The Deprivation in Primary Care Questionnaire (DiPCare-Q) was developed using qualitative and quantitative approaches between 2008 and 2011. A systematic review identified 199 questions related to deprivation. Using judgmental item quality, these were reduced to 38 questions. Two focus groups (primary-care physicians, and primary-care researchers), structured interviews (10 laymen), and think aloud interviews (eight cleaning staff) assured face validity. Item response theory analysis was then used to derive the DiPCare-Q index using data obtained from a random sample of 200 patients who were to complete the questionnaire a second time over the phone. For construct and criterion validity, the final 16 questions were administered to a random sample of 1,898 patients attending one of 47 different private primary-care practices in western Switzerland (validation set) along with questions on subjective social status (subjective SES ladder), education, source of income, welfare status, and subjective poverty. Results: Deprivation was defined in three distinct dimensions (table); material deprivation (eight items), social deprivation (five items) and health deprivation (three items). Item consistency was high in both the derivation (KR20 = 0.827) and the validation set (KR20 = 0.778). The DiPCare-Q index was reliable (ICC = 0.847). For construct validity, we showed the DiPCare-Q index to be correlated to patients' estimation of their position on the subjective SES ladder (rs = 0.539). This position was correlated to both material and social deprivation independently suggesting two separate mechanisms enhancing the feeling of deprivation. Conclusion: The DiPCare-Q is a rapid, reliable and validated instrument useful for measuring both material and social deprivation in primary care. Questions from the DiPCare-Q are easy to use when investigating patients' social history and could improve clinicians' ability to detect underlying social distress related to deprivation.

Self-reported smoking cessation activities among Swiss primary care physicians.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Individual counselling, pharmacotherapy, and group therapy are evidence-based interventions that help patients stop smoking. Acupuncture, hypnosis, and relaxation have no demonstrated efficacy on smoking cessation, whereas self-help material may only have a small benefit. The purpose of this study is to assess physicians' current clinical practice regarding smokers motivated to stop smoking. METHODS: The survey included 3385 Swiss primary care physicians. Self-reported use of nine smoking cessation interventions was scored. One point was given for each positive answer about practicing interventions with demonstrated efficacy, i.e. nicotine replacement therapy, bupropion, counselling, group therapy, and smoking cessation specialist. No points were given for the recommendation of acupuncture, hypnosis, relaxation, and self-help material. Multivariable logistic analysis was performed to identify factors associated with a good practice score, defined as >1. RESULTS: The response rate was 55%. Respondents were predominately over the age of 40 years (88%), male (79%), and resided in urban areas (74%). Seventeen percent reported being smokers. Most of the physicians prescribed nicotine replacement therapy (84%), bupropion (65%), or provided counselling (70%). A minority of physicians recommended acupuncture (26%), hypnosis (8%), relaxation (7%), or self-help material (24%). A good practice score was obtained by 85% of respondents. Having attended a smoking cessation training program was the only significant predictor of a good practice score (odds ratio: 6.24 , 95% CI 1.95-20.04). CONCLUSION: The majority of respondents practice recommended smoking cessation interventions. However, there is room for improvement and implementing an evidence-based smoking cessation-training program could provide additional benefit.

How important are interview methods and questionnaire designs in research on self-reported juvenile delinquency? An experimental comparison of internet vs. paper-and-pencil questionnaires and different definitions of the reference period

There has been relatively little change over recent decades in the methods used in research on self-reported delinquency. Face-to-face interviews and selfadministered interviews in the classroom are still the predominant alternatives envisaged. New methods have been brought into the picture by recent computer technology, the Internet, and an increasing availability of computer equipment and Internet access in schools. In the autumn of 2004, a controlled experiment was conducted with 1,203 students in Lausanne (Switzerland), where "paper-and-pencil" questionnaires were compared with computer-assisted interviews through the Internet. The experiment included a test of two different definitions of the (same) reference period. After the introductory question ("Did you ever..."), students were asked how many times they had done it (or experienced it), if ever, "over the last 12 months" or "since the October 2003 vacation". Few significant differences were found between the results obtained by the two methods and for the two definitions of the reference period, in the answers concerning victimisation, self-reported delinquency, drug use, failure to respond (missing data). Students were found to be more motivated to respond through the Internet, take less time for filling out the questionnaire, and were apparently more confident of privacy, while the school principals were less reluctant to allow classes to be interviewed through the Internet. The Internet method also involves considerable cost reductions, which is a critical advantage if self-reported delinquency surveys are to become a routinely applied method of evaluation, particularly so in countries with limited resources. On balance, the Internet may be instrumental in making research on self-reported delinquency far more feasible in situations where limited resources so far have prevented its implementation.

Differing trends in the association between obesity and self-reported health in Portugal and Switzerland: data from national health surveys 1992-2007.

BACKGROUND: The escalating prevalence of obesity might prompt obese subjects to consider themselves as normal, as this condition is gradually becoming as frequent as normal weight. In this study, we aimed to assess the trends in the associations between obesity and self-rated health in two countries. METHODS: Data from the Portuguese (years 1995-6, 1998-6 and 2005-6) and Swiss (1992-3, 1997, 2002 and 2007) National Health Surveys were used, corresponding to more than 130,000 adults (64,793 for Portugal and 65,829 for Switzerland). Body mass index and self-rated health were derived from self-reported data. RESULTS: Obesity levels were higher in Portugal (17.5% in 2005-6 vs. 8.9% in 2007 in Switzerland, p < 0.001) and increased in both countries. The prevalence of participants rating their health as "bad" or "very bad" was higher in Portugal than in Switzerland (21.8% in 2005-6 vs 3.9% in 2007, p < 0.001). In both countries, obese participants rated more frequently their health as "bad" or "very bad" than participants with regular weight. In Switzerland, the prevalence of "bad" or "very bad" rates among obese participants, increased from 6.5% in 1992-3 to 9.8% in 2007, while in Portugal it decreased from 41.3% to 32.3%. After multivariate adjustment, the odds ratio (OR) of stating one self's health as "bad" or "very bad" among obese relative to normal weight participants, almost doubled in Switzerland: from 1.38 (95% confidence interval, CI: 1.01-1.87) in 1992-3 to 2.64 (95% CI: 2.14-3.26) in 2007, and similar findings were obtained after sample weighting. Conversely, no such trend was found in Portugal: 1.35 (95% CI: 1.23-1.48) in 1995-6 and 1.52 (95% CI: 1.37-1.70) in 2005-6. CONCLUSION: Obesity is increasing in Switzerland and Portugal. Obesity is increasingly associated with poorer self-health ratings in Switzerland but not in Portugal.

Self-reported adherence and associated factors regarding antihypertensive medication in Seychelles

Introduction. Adherence to medication for asymptomatic disease is often low. We assessed factors associated with good adherence to medication for high blood pressure (HBP) in a country of the African region. Methods. A population-based survey of adults aged 25-64 years (N=1240 and participation rate=73%). Information was available in knowledge attitude and practice, SES and other variables. One question assessed adherence. Good adherence to treatment was defined as answering "I forget very rarely" vs "I forget on 1-2 days in a week" or "I forget on 3 or more days in a week". Results. In a univariate model adherence was strongly associated with belief that hypertension is a long-term disease (OR 2.6, p<0.001) and was negatively associated with concomitant use of traditional medicine (OR 0.36, p<0.005). The following variables tended to be associated with good adherence for HBP treatment: age, SES, BMI, belief that HBP is not symptomatic, going to government's clinics, medium stress level, controlled hypertension, taking statins. The following variables were not associated with good adherence for HBP treatment: education, higher BP, knowing people who had a stroke/MI, suffering from another chronic condition. In a multivariate model, pseudo R2 was 0.14. Conclusion. We built a multidimensional model including a wide range of variable. This model only predicted 14% of adherence variability. Variables associated with good adherence were demographics or related to knowledge attitude and practice. The latter one is modifiable by different type of interventions.