Abstract
Background Cotrimoxazole and isoniazid preventive therapy (CPT, IPT) have been shown to be efficacious therapies for the prevention of opportunistic infections and tuberculosis (TB) among people living with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). Despite governments’ efforts to translate World Health Organization recommendations into practice, implementation remains challenging. This review aimed to explore and compare CPT and IPT with respect to similarities and differences of barriers identified across high TB/HIV burden countries. A secondary objective was to identify facilitators for implementing both preventive therapies.
Methods We searched MEDLINE, Web of Science and SCOPUS databases for peer-reviewed literature published before September 2020. We extracted and synthesized our findings using Maxqda software. We applied framework synthesis in conjunction with metasummary to compare both therapies with respect to similarities and differences of barriers identified across seven health system components (in line with the modified WHO’s Framework for action). Protocol registration: PROSPERO (CRD42019137778).
Findings We identified four hundred and eighty-two papers, of which we included forty for review. Although most barrier themes were identical for both preventive therapies, we identified seven intervention-specific themes. Like for CPT, barriers identified for IPT were most frequently classified as ‘service delivery-related barriers’ and ‘patient & community-related barriers’. ‘Health provider-related barriers’ played an additional important role for implementing of IPT. Most facilitators identified referred to health system strengthening activities.
Conclusions For researchers with limited working experience in high TB/HIV burden countries, this review can provide valuable insights about barriers that may arise at different levels of the health system. For policymakers in high TB/HIV burden countries, this review offers strategies for improving the delivery of IPT (or any newer therapy regimen) for the prevention of TB. Based on our findings, we suggest initial and continuous stakeholder involvement, a focus on the efficient use and reinforcement of existing resources for health.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study was funded by the Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology (www.FCT.pt), through funds to the Global Health and Tropical Medicine Research Center (Grant number: GHTM - UID/Multi/04413/2013). The study was supported by funds from the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF, https://www.bmbf.de/), through funds to the Hans-Boeckler Stiftung (HBS). LVL was funded by the FCT grant. PM received a Research Scholarship from the HBS (PhD Scholarship ID: 385759). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
We declare that there are no ethical or legal restrictions on sharing data related to our systematic review. This study does not involve collection of primary data. Therefore, bioethical authorization is not required.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
Yes, all data are fully available without restriction. All relevant data are within the paper and its Supporting information files. Peer-reviewed studies included in our review can be obtained through either MEDLINE, Web of Science or Scopus database searching.
https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=137778
