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)