Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Network meta-analysis reveals higher viral suppression with integrated maternal-child care versus adherence clubs in postpartum women with HIV, indicating superior long-term retention.
OBJECTIVE: To compare viral suppression between two models of care [adherence club and integrated maternal and child healthcare (MCH)] for improving engagement of postpartum women with HIV (WWH) to antiretroviral therapy (ART). DESIGN: Individual participant data network meta-analysis (IPD-NMA) of two randomized controlled trials in Cape Town, South Africa [Postpartum Adherence Clubs for Antiretroviral Therapy (PACART) comparing adherence clubs to standard of care (primary healthcare ART clinics, SOC), and MCH-ART comparing integrated MCH for the duration of breastfeeding to SOC]. METHODS: One-step IPD-NMA using generalized linear mixed effects models was performed to indirectly compare viral suppression (viral load<50 copies/ml) between adherence clubs and integrated MCH at 6 and 12 months postpartum, linked by SOC as a comparator. RESULTS: Overall, 882 women were included: 471 enrolled in MCH-ART and 411 in PACART. In MCH-ART, 87 and 79% of women in intervention arm had viral suppression at 6 and 12 months postpartum, compared to 70 and 54% in SOC. In PACART, 87 and 74% of women had viral suppression at 6 and 12 months in intervention arm, compared to 79 and 67% in SOC. Adjusting for age, parity, socioeconomic status, tuberculosis (TB) history, HIV diagnosis time, ART duration, and viral load less than 400 copies/ml at enrolment, relative odds of viral suppression in integrated MCH versus adherence clubs were 2 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.88-4.53] at 6 months and 2.89 (CI: 1.42-5.90) at 12 months. CONCLUSION: In this setting, an integrated MCH model for delivering ART postpartum achieved higher levels and more sustained effect on viral suppression compared to adherence clubs, a popular differentiated service delivery (DSD) model for ART.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Shuaib et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: