Skip to main content

Table 5 Association between adherence scores by different adherence tools and virological suppression in pregnant and breastfeeding women at 12 months after ART initiation

From: Using a composite adherence tool to assess ART response and risk factors of poor adherence in pregnant and breastfeeding HIV-positive Cameroonian women at 6 and 12 months after initiating option B+

Adherence variable Participants who received VL assessments N = 165 VL ≥ 1000 copies/mL
N = 12 (7.3)
VL < 1000 copies/mL
N = 153 (92.7)
aOR (95%CI) P-value
Pharmacy refill
 Low adherence 17 (10.3) 6/17 (35.3) 11/17 (64.7) 14.4 (3.8–54.8) 0.0001
 Moderate adherence 11 (6.7) 1/11 (9.1) 10/11 (90.9) 2.6 (0.3–24.8) 0.395
 High adherence 137 (83.0) 5/137 (3.6) 132/137 (96.4) 1  
Self-report
 Low adherence 7 (4.2) 4/7 (57.1) 3/7 (42.9) 21.2 (4.0–111.2) 0.0003
 Moderate adherence 25 (15.2) 2/25 (8.0) 23/25 (92.0) 1.4 (0.3–6.9) 0.695
 High adherence 133 (80.6) 6/133 (4.5) 127/133 (95.5) 1  
VAS
 Low adherence 18 (10.9) 9/18 (50.0) 9/18 (50.0) 124.0 (14.1–1090.4) < 0.0001
 Moderate adherence 22 (13.3) 2/22 (9.1) 20/22 (90.9) 12.4 (1.1–143.0) 0.06
 High adherence 125 (75.8) 1/125 (0.8) 124/125 (99.2) 1  
CAS
 Low adherence 17 (10.3) 8/17 (47.1) 9/17 (52.9) 7.6 (1.8–30.8) 0.005
 Moderate adherence 38 (23.0) 4/38 (10.5) 34/38 (89.5) 1  
 High adherence 110 (66.7) 0 (0.0) 110/110 (100)  
  1. Data are in numbers and percentages [n (%)].abinary logistic regression, OR (crude odd ratio)