| Popis: |
Abstract Background HIV/AIDS continues to be a significant contributor to illness and death, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa. In this study, we conducted a qualitative assessment to understand Client and Healthcare Provider Perspectives on Differential Service Delivery Models in Uganda. The purpose was to establish strengths and weaknesses within the services delivery models, inform policy and decision-making, and to facilitate context specific solutions. Methods Between February and April 2023, a qualitative cross-sectional study was utilised to gather insights from a targeted selection of individuals, including People Living with HIV (PLHIV), healthcare workers, HIV focal persons, community retail pharmacists, and various stakeholders. The data collection process included eleven in-depth interviews, nine key informant interviews, and eight focus group discussions carried out across eight districts in Central Uganda. The collected data was analyzed through inductive thematic analysis with the aid of Excel. Results The various Differentiated Service Delivery Models (DSDMs), notably Community-Client-Led Drug Distribution (CCLAD), Community Drug Distribution Point (CDDP), Community Retail Pharmacy Drug Distribution Point (CRPDDP), and the facility-based Facility Based Individual Model (FBIM), were reported to have several positive impacts. These included improved treatment adherence, efficient management of antiretroviral (ARV) supplies, reduced exposure to infectious diseases, enhanced healthcare worker hospitality, minimized travel time for ART refills, stigma reduction, and decreased waiting times. Concern was raised about the lack of improvement in HIV status disclosure, opportunistic infection treatment, adherence to seasonal appointments, and sustainability due to the overreliance of the DSDMs on donor funding, suggesting potential discontinuation without funding. Doubts about health workers’ commitment surfaced. Notably, the CCLAD model displayed self-sustainability, with clients financially supporting group members to collect medicines. Conclusion Community-based DSDMs, such as CCLAD and CDDP, improve ART refill convenience, social support, and client experiences. These models reduce travel and waiting times, lowering infection risks. Addressing challenges and enhancing facility-based models is vital. In order to maintain funding after donor funding ends, sustainability measures like cross-subsidization can be used. If well implemented, the DSDMs have the potential to produce better or comparable ART outcomes compared to the FBIM model. |
