Background. Accumulating
evidence suggests responses to HIV that combine individual-level interventions
with those that address structural or contextual factors that influence risks
and health outcomes of infection. Housing is such a factor. Housing occupies a
strategic position as an intermediate structural factor, linking “upstream”
economic, social, and cultural determinants to the more immediate physical and
social environments in which everyday life is lived. The importance of housing
status for HIV prevention and care has been recognized, but much of this attention
has focused on homeless individuals as a special risk group. Analyses have less
often addressed community housing availability and conditions as factors
influencing population health or unstable, inadequate, or unaffordable housing
as a situation or temporary state. A focus on individual-level characteristics
associated with literal homelessness glosses over social, economic, and policy
drivers operating largely outside any specific individual’s control that affect
housing and residential environments and the health resources or risk exposures
such contexts provide.
Objectives. We
examined the available empirical evidence on the association between housing
status (broadly defined), medical care, and health outcomes among people with
HIV and analyzed results to inform future research, program development, and
policy implementation.
Search methods. We
searched 8 electronic health and social science databases from January 1, 1996,
through March 31, 2014, using search terms related to housing, dwelling, and
living arrangements and HIV and AIDS. We contacted experts for additional
literature.
Selection criteria. We
selected articles if they were quantitative analyses published in English,
French, or Spanish that included at least 1 measure of housing status as an
independent variable and at least 1 health status, health care, treatment
adherence, or risk behavior outcome among people with HIV in high-income
countries. We defined housing status to include consideration of material or
social dimensions of housing adequacy, stability, and security of tenure.
Data collection
and analysis. Two independent reviewers performed
data extraction and quality appraisal. We used the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool
for randomized controlled trials and a modified version of the Newcastle Ottawa
Quality Appraisal Tool for nonintervention studies. In our quality appraisal,
we focused on issues of quality for observational studies: appropriate methods
for determining exposure and measuring outcomes and methods to control
confounding.
Results. Searches
yielded 5528 references from which we included 152 studies, representing 139 757
HIV-positive participants. Most studies were conducted in the United States and
Canada. Studies examined access and utilization of HIV medical care, adherence
to antiretroviral medications, HIV clinical outcomes, other health outcomes,
emergency department and inpatient utilization, and sex and drug risk
behaviors. With rare exceptions, across studies in all domains, worse housing
status was independently associated with worse outcomes, controlling for a
range of individual patient and care system characteristics.
Conclusions. Lack
of stable, secure, adequate housing is a significant barrier to consistent and
appropriate HIV medical care, access and adherence to antiretroviral
medications, sustained viral suppression, and risk of forward transmission.
Studies that examined the history of homelessness or problematic housing years
before outcome assessment were least likely to find negative outcomes,
homelessness being a potentially modifiable contextual factor. Randomized
controlled trials and observational studies indicate an independent effect of
housing assistance on improved outcomes for formerly homeless or inadequately
housed people with HIV. Housing challenges result from complex interactions
between individual vulnerabilities and broader economic, political, and legal
structural determinants of health. The broad structural processes sustaining
social exclusion and inequality seem beyond the immediate reach of HIV
interventions, but changing housing and residential environments is both
possible and promising.
Full article at: http://goo.gl/SdaRss
By: Angela A. Aidala, PhD, Michael G. Wilson, PhD, Virginia Shubert, JD, David Gogolishvili, MPH, Jason Globerman, MSc, Sergio Rueda, PhD, Anne K. Bozack, MPH, Maria Caban, PhD, MA, and Sean B. Rourke, PhD
Angela A. Aidala
is with the Department of Sociomedical Sciences, Mailman School of Public
Health, Columbia University, New York, NY. Michael G. Wilson is with the
Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University,
Hamilton, ON, Canada. Virginia Shubert is with Shubert Botein Policy
Associates, New York, NY. At the time of this study, David Gogolishvili, Jason
Globerman, Sergio Rueda, and Sean B. Rourke were with the Ontario HIV Treatment
Network, Toronto, ON, Canada. Anne K. Bozack is with the Department of
Environmental Health Sciences, Mailman School of Public Health. Maria Caban is
with the Department of Research and Evaluation, BOOM!Health, New York, NY.
Corresponding
author.
Correspondence should be sent to Angela Aidala, PhD,
Department of Sociomedical Sciences, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia
University, 722 168th St., Rm 551, New York, NY 10032 (e-mail: ude.aibmuloc@1aaa).
Reprints can be ordered at http://www.ajph.org by clicking the
“Reprints” link.
More at: https://twitter.com/hiv
insight
No comments:
Post a Comment