The focus of this project was to reduce alcohol consumption among male persons living with HIV (PLHIV) on antiretroviral treatment (ART) at government hospitals in urban Maharashtra, India and factors associated with both these outcomes including depression, stigma, social support networks, quality of life and health status.~The project consisted of three phases; formative research, intervention implementation and analysis and dissemination. Formative research included key informant interviews and observation at the ART Centers, screening of close to 10,000 patients to identify male PLHIV who met the eligibility criteria, a baseline survey instrument (T1) that assessed a wide range of variables associated with the outcome variables and modeling alternative intervention programs for impact and cost effectiveness. Of 13 ART Centers in the Mumbai, Navi Mumbai, and Thane areas of Maharashtra, five ART Centers were selected for the project with a sample of 940 male PLHIV, 188 from each of the five ART Centers.~The second phase of the project was the development and implementation of three interventions assigned randomly to each of the experimental ART Centers with two of the Centers selected randomly as controls. The interventions were individual counseling (IC), group intervention (GI) and collective advocacy (CA). In Cycle 1 of the intervention phase, the interventions were implemented in each of three experimental ART Centers. In Cycle 2, each of the experimental centers received a second intervention (e.g. GI in Cycle 1+ IC in Cycle 2) and in Cycle 3 each of the experimental Centers received the third intervention (GI in Cycle 1 + IC in Cycle 2 + CA in Cycle 3). In addition, in Cycle 3, one of the two controls received an integrated package of IC, GI and CA. This crossover design test the sequencing and packaging of multi-level interventions for behavior change by examining the efficacy of any one intervention versus control, any two combinations of interventions versus controle, all interventions versus control and the integrated package versus control.~The IC intervention involved one-on-one interaction with a project counselor involving a pre-intervention session in which the PLHIV participant selected the priority issues to be discussed and four additional sessions to address tensions and anxieties, stigma and disclosure, relationships and alcohol and adherence. The sessions were facilitated by in the use of a tablet both to structure the interaction and to collect process data. GI involved four sessions in which 6-10 PLHIV were gathered for intervention on healthy living with HIV, tension, relationships and alcohol and adherence. CA involved groups of 10-15 PLHIV in five sessions in which the focus was on increasing the capacity of participants to advocate both for themselves and a collective group for issues that affected PLHIV human rights, entitlements and services.~The third and current phase of the project is analysis of qualitative data including key informant and in-depth interviews with PLHIV and assessments of fidelity and acceptability of the interventions and quantitative data that includes the screening instrument and baseline (T1) and follow-up outcome data (T2, T3, T4 follow-up surveys after each intervention for both experimental and control centers. This phase will also involve dissemination of results to the National AIDS Control Organizations and its subsidiaries at the State and District levels, the participating ART Centers and to Positive Peoples' Networks at the state and national levels and to national and international meetings and publications.
The focus of this project was to reduce alcohol consumption among male persons living with HIV (PLHIV) on antiretroviral treatment (ART) at government hospitals in urban Maharashtra, India and factors associated with both these outcomes including depression, stigma, social support networks, quality of life and health status. The project consisted of three phases; formative research, implementation of multilevel interventions and analysis of process and outcome data. The project utilized a crossover design to compare outcomes of individual interventions and the sequences of intervention.