Skip to main content
PLOS Global Public Health logoLink to PLOS Global Public Health
. 2025 Jun 4;5(6):e0004701. doi: 10.1371/journal.pgph.0004701

Harnessing HIV clinics to deliver integrated hypertension care for People living with HIV in Uganda: A formative mixed methods study

Fred C Semitala 1,2,3,#, Florence Ayebare 3,*,#, John Baptist Kiggundu 3, Christine Kiwala 3, Joel Senfuma 3, Gerald N Mutungi 4, Isaac Ssinabulya 1,5,6, James Kayima 5, Martin Muddu 3, Donna Spiegelman 7, Jeremy I Schwartz 6,7, Chris T Longenecker 8, Anne R Katahoire 9
Editor: Jepchirchir Kiplagat10
PMCID: PMC12136366  PMID: 40465676

Abstract

Access to antiretroviral therapy has led to better treatment outcomes for aging people living with HIV worldwide. However, in Uganda and other parts of sub-Saharan Africa, PLHIV with comorbidities like hypertension experience fragmented healthcare access, despite existing guidelines for the integration of non-communicable diseases into HIV care. We assessed knowledge, attitudes, and practices of PLHIV regarding hypertension care, and their perceptions of integrated hypertension-HIV care. We used a parallel convergent-mixed methods approach to collect quantitative and qualitative data from HIV clinics in urban and peri-urban Uganda. We surveyed PLHIV with hypertension to explore their knowledge, attitudes, and practices related to HTN. We selected a sub-sample from survey participants for qualitative interviews, to explore their perceptions of hypertension care and integrated HTN and HIV services. We analyzed quantitative data using STATA 14.1 and analyzed qualitative data deductively mapping it onto the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. A total of 394 PLHIV (325 in Kampala and 69 in neighboring Wakiso district) were enrolled in the study. Their median age was 52 years (IQR 44–59), and 300 (76%) were female. Only 32% of the participants correctly identified the normal range for systolic blood pressure (BP) (80–140 mmHg) and 24% diastolic BP (60–90 mmHg). Although 87% of the participants recognized that hypertension was treatable, only 62% knew that the treatment was lifelong. Barriers identified through interviews included fragmented care delivery, frequent hypertension medication shortages, interruptions due to side effects, high out of pocket costs of hypertension drugs, use of herbal remedies, and PLHIV discontinuing medication upon feeling better. Integrating chronic care for co-morbidities like hypertension in HIV clinics in Uganda offers an opportunity to address key barriers, including knowledge gaps, inconsistent medication access, and fragmented care delivery. The findings of this formative assessment informed the development of strategies to integrate hypertension-HIV care in Uganda.

Introduction

Chronic HIV infection is known to increase the risk of cardiovascular diseases (CVD) [1], such as heart failure [2], stroke [3], and myocardial infarction [4]. Sub-Saharan Africa is disproportionately affected by HIV-related CVD, accounting for half of the global burden of disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) lost. In some parts of Africa, the population-attributable fraction risk for HIV-associated CVD can be as high as 15%. Hypertension (HTN) is the leading risk factor for CVD in Africa [5], contributing 43% of the population-attributable risk for ischemic heart disease [6] and 15% for stroke [7].

Hypertension is a major cause of CVD disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) in Uganda, accounting for four times more cases compared to the high concentration of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol [8]. Uganda is undergoing an epidemiological transition characterized by a decline in infectious diseases coupled with an increase in non-communicable diseases (NCDs) [5]. The advent of antiretroviral therapy has enabled PLHIV to live longer, however, this has also seen a higher prevalence of age-related co-morbidities. Older PLHIV experience increased co-morbidities like hypertension having spent several years on ART [6,7]. This highlights the urgent need to strengthen health systems to address the growing burden of NCDs. The 2020 Uganda Ministry of Health (MoH) guidelines recommend integration of HIV and non-communicable disease (NCD) care, so that PLHIV receive both HIV and hypertension care within a single clinical setting, administered by the same healthcare provider, and scheduled on the same day. This integrated approach provides PLHIV-centered care, reduces fragmentation and duplication of services [9], and is more efficient than separate programs. However, to improve clinical outcomes (such as blood pressure control), existing barriers to HTN and HIV integration must be addressed. Studies in Uganda and other LMICs have identified barriers to effective HTN management, such as limited knowledge [10,11], inconsistent BP measurement, and inadequate access to medications [12]. However, there is limited information on how stakeholders’ knowledge, perceptions, and experiences have been incorporated into the design of feasible and scalable implementation strategies to address these barriers and leverage facilitators to optimize integrated HTN- HIV services in HIV clinical settings. In a recent pilot study, we implemented an integrated HTN-HIV care model at a large HIV clinic in Uganda. In this study that trained healthcare providers and provided a regular supply of evidence-based anti-HTN medications to over 1000 PLHIV with HTN and HIV, up to 75.2% of PLHIV achieved HTN control at six months [13].

This work builds on the pilot study [14] to scale HTN integration to a larger, more diverse group of HIV clinics in Kampala and Wakiso districts, encompassing government-run and private not-for-profit (PNFP) facilities. This manuscript reports on the pre-implementation work aimed at identifying factors that could guide the integration of HTN services into routine HIV care by addressing existing gaps.

We utilized the findings from this formative work to create a PLHIV-centered multi-component implementation strategy to improve uptake and adherence to evidence-based BP treatments, which are contextually adapted to Ugandan HIV clinics. The strategy is being tested in a stepped-wedge cluster-randomized trial at sixteen HIV clinics in Kampala and Wakiso districts. This paper focuses on PLHIV’s knowledge, attitudes, practices, and perceptions regarding HTN and integrated HTN-HIV care. The integrated model presented in this manuscript facilitates the provision of hypertension and HIV services within a “one–stop shop” framework, allowing PLHIV to access both services during a single visit. In this model, a single provider attends to PLHIV for both conditions, and all necessary medications are dispensed at a single point, other services include blood pressure measurement for screening and subsequent monitoring of hypertension control, counseling on the clinical consequences of hypertension, need for treatment (including lifestyle modification and medication) and monitoring for and mitigating any side-effects of medication.

The “Strengthening Blood Pressure Care and Treatment Cascade Metrics Among PLHIV in Peri-Urban and Urban Areas - Implementation Strategies to Save Lives (PULESA-Uganda)” study is an implementation trial aimed at improving hypertension care metrics among PLHIV in a sustainable way. The study is one of the six projects under the Heart, Lung, and Blood Co-morbiditieS IMplementation Models in People Living with HIV, funded by the United States National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute. These six projects are being implemented in Uganda, Botswana, Zambia, Mozambique, Nigeria, and South Africa. [15]. Before conducting the trial, we carried out a formative study to understand the context, needs, attitudes and practices of PLHIV with hypertension who attend HIV clinics in Kampala and Wakiso districts.

The study assessed PLHIV’s knowledge and attitudes toward hypertension as a health condition and hypertension management. It also identified key barriers to the integration of care. The findings from this formative study informed the development of a more contextually appropriate intervention.

Guiding framework: The consolidated framework for implementation research

For the formative assessment, we utilized the 2009 version of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) [10], a widely recognized framework designed to identify determinants of implementation. It is important to note that this study was designed and conducted prior to the publication of the updated 2022 version of CFIR. The primary objective was to assess PLHIV’s knowledge, attitudes and practices related to hypertension care alongside their perceptions of an integrated HTN_HIV care model. The CFIR constructs incorporated into the study included characteristics of individuals, patients’ needs and resources, relative advantage and adaptability.

Methods

Study design

We conducted a parallel convergent mixed-methods study [11] that involved concurrently collecting and analyzing quantitative and qualitative data. This approach aimed to enhance the interpretability of data on PLHIV’s knowledge, attitudes, practices, and perceptions of HTN and its integration into HIV care. We aimed to comprehensively understand PLHIV’s knowledge, attitudes, practices, and perceptions toward HTN in the context of integrated HTN-HIV care.

Study setting

Uganda’s seven-tier healthcare system comprises national and regional referral hospitals, district hospitals, health centers (IV, III, II), and village health teams. Health center IVs offer both in-patient and outpatient services managed by medical doctors, whereas health center IIIs offer outpatient services overseen by clinical officers and nurses. For our study, we surveyed PLHIV with HTN who were seeking HIV care at three hospitals (one public national referral hospital, two PNFP hospitals), three health center IVs, and four health center III in Kampala and Wakiso districts (Table 1).

Table 1. Sites where the formative component of the PULESA Uganda study was conducted.

Clinic site Clinic type Clinic size* Location No. PLHIV Estimated PLHIV with HTN KAP Survey IDI
Kampala
Kisenyi HC IV Public Large Urban 11972 2502 118 4
Kawaala HCIV Public Large Urban 8814 1842 86 4
Komamboga HC III Public Large Urban 4732 989 30 4
St. Francis Hospital PNFP Large Urban 7911 1653 78 4
Butabika Hospital Public Small Urban 1310 274 13 4
Wakiso
Kisubi Hospital PNFP Large Peri-urban 2221 464 22 4
Nsangi HCIII Public Small Peri-urban 1865 390 18 4
Kawanda HC III Public Small Peri-urban 830 173 8 4
Nakawuka HCIII Public Small Peri-urban 852 178 7 4
Kira HCIV Public Small Peri-urban 1120 234 14 4
Total 42021 8782 394 40

IDI; In-depth interview HC; Health Centre, KAP; Knowledge, attitudes and practice, PNFP; Private not for profit

*Large HIV clinics were defined as clinics providing HIV care to >2000 PLHIV and small clinics were clinics that provided HIV care to 400–2000 PLHIVs at the time of the study.

Study participants

The study involved adults who had both HTN and HIV and were receiving HIV care at selected clinics. Eligibility criteria included being 18 years or older, receiving HIV care at one of the ten participating clinics, having a confirmed hypertension diagnosis (BP ≥ 140/90 on two or more occasions in the past 12 months or on anti-hypertensive medication), and providing informed consent. We excluded individuals with cognitive impairment from the study.

We estimated the number of PLHIV with hypertension at each clinic by applying a hypertension prevalence rate of 20.9% [12]. We obtained the number of PLHIV with hypertension at each clinic and the overall total. We then calculated a proportion for each clinic by dividing the estimated number of PLHIV with hypertension at each clinic by the overall total and applied this proportion to the calculated sample size. This approach ensured that PLHIV were recruited from each clinic in equal proportions. However, the target sample size was not reached in clinics where hypertension screening was not conducted, or documentation was lacking. Using consecutive sampling, we enrolled eligible PLHIV through chart reviews and healthcare provider referrals at the participating clinics. For the qualitative component, we purposively selected a sub-sample of four PLHIV per facility (n = 40), using maximum variation to identify individuals by age, sex, and duration of HTN (newly diagnosed versus those with a known diagnosis). Newly diagnosed PLHIV were those diagnosed with HTN within the preceding six months, while previously diagnosed PLHIV had been diagnosed for six months or more. There were no refusals from PLHIV to participate in qualitative interviews.

Data collection

Our study employed a parallel convergent design therefore data collection for both quantitative and qualitative data was conducted concurrently between 15th June and 31st December 2021. Quantitative data was collected through a survey questionnaire while interviews were conducted via a semi-structured interview guide.

Quantitative data.

We conducted a survey and used a questionnaire (S1 Text) to gather information on different aspects of hypertension (HTN). We included questions about PLHIV’s socio-demographic characteristics, lifestyle factors (such as tobacco use and excessive alcohol consumption), medical and family history, as well as their knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAP) regarding HTN. The survey comprised 28 questions assessing PLHIV’s knowledge, 12 questions on attitudes, and 10 questions on practices related to HTN. Topics covered included screening, diagnosis, risk factors, treatment, complications, and lifestyle modifications.

Trained Research assistants enrolled eligible PLHIV and administered a pre-tested questionnaire sequentially until each health facility’s targeted sample size was achieved (Table 1). The survey was conducted in Luganda, a commonly spoken language in central Uganda, with a few PLHIV interviewed in English. The questionnaire was pretested at a large tertiary clinic in Kampala, which was not part of the study clinics.

Qualitative data.

Qualitative data exploring PLHIV’s perceptions of hypertension and integrated care were gathered through in-depth interviews. A semi-structured interview guide (S2 Text), informed by the 2009 version of CFIR, was developed to ensure a systematic exploration of key constructs. Trained research assistants – male and female university graduates fluent in Luganda and English, with extensive experience in qualitative research conducted the interviews. A total of forty (n = 40) face -to-face interviews were carried out in private spaces within clinics or health facilities, each lasting between 45 and 60 minutes. All interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and translated into English to facilitate analysis. Data collection continued until thematic saturation was reached, which was determined by the 40th interview [16]. To enhance the rigor of the study, the interview guide was pre-tested at a non-participating HIV clinic in Kampala, ensuring clarity and appropriateness of the questions.

Ethical considerations

The research study received approval from the Makerere University School of Medicine Research and Ethics Committee (SOMREC) (Mak-SOMREC-2021–58) and was registered with the Uganda National Council for Science and Technology (UNCST) (SS808ES). Administrative clearance was obtained from the MoH, Kampala Capital City Authority, and Wakiso District Local Government. Before participating in the study, all PLHIV provided written informed consent.

Data analysis

We analyzed quantitative and qualitative data separately (Table 2) and combined them to understand PLHIV’s knowledge, attitudes, and practices regarding HTN, as well as their views on an integrated HIV-HTN care model.

Table 2. Data Sources and approaches for data collection and analysis in the formative study.

Study objective Method Study Population Data Analysis
Assess PLHIV’s knowledge, attitudes and practices about HTN, HTN management, and control in HIV clinics in Kampala and Wakiso districts. Quantitative
KAP Survey questionnaire
PLHIV with HTN descriptive analysis
Assess PLHIV’s perceptions of current HTN management and control practices in HIV clinics in Kampala and Wakiso Districts. Qualitative
Semi-structured interviews
PLHIV with HTN Deductively based on CFIR constructs.

HTN- HTN, KAP- Knowledge Attitudes and Practices, PLHIV- PLHIV.

Quantitative data analysis

The survey questions were developed in a REDCap database [14,17] and we used STATA version 14.1 for quantitative data analysis. For statistical analysis, categorical data were summarized using proportions and frequencies. For normally distributed continuous data, means and standard deviations were used, while median and interquartile range were used for skewed continuous data. Composite scores for each KAP domain were calculated, and district comparisons were performed using chi-squared tests (categorical variables) and Mann-Whitney tests (continuous variables).

Qualitative data analysis

We used NVivo 20 [18,19] to manage the qualitative dataset. In our analysis, we followed a team-based approach to identify emerging themes and develop a preliminary codebook inductively. We held a series of meetings to discuss emerging themes through consensus building. We then utilized a deductive approach to align the emerging themes from inductive coding and mapped them onto the CFIR domains and constructs. The larger research team discussed the preliminary themes and triangulated responses from semi-structured interviews with KAP survey data to reach a consensus on the final deductive themes.

We followed the established criteria and standards for reporting qualitative research (S1 COREQ Checklist) and maintained an audit trail of the coding process to ensure credibility and trustworthiness [20,21].

Data integration

We used a parallel convergent design for this study. Data were integrated [11] in two ways. We collected quantitative and qualitative data simultaneously, a process known as mixed methods integration. Secondly, we utilized the connecting method, linking quantitative data to qualitative data through sampling. The qualitative sample was a subset of the quantitative sample.

We combined both approaches better understand HTN care practices in HIV clinics, and PLHIV’s perceptions of HTN-HIV care integration. Fig 1 provides a visual representation of the mixed methods design used in this study.

Fig 1. Visual representation of how methods were mixed using the parallel convergent mixed methods approach.

Fig 1

Results

The results of this study are structured around the key domains and constructs of the CFIR, which guided our formative assessment. These domains—characteristics of individuals, patients’ needs and resources, relative advantage, and adaptability—provide a comprehensive framework for understanding the factors influencing the integration of HTN care in HIV clinics.

Characteristics of study participants

A total of 537 PLHIV with HTN were identified for the study. Of these, 439 (81.7%) were successfully contacted, and 394 (73.4%) participated in the survey (Fig 2). The median age of PLHIV was 52 years (IQR 44–59), with a higher proportion of females (76.1%, n = 300). Most (51.3%, n = 202) had only completed primary-level education participants (Table 3). Geographically, most PLHIV were from Kampala (n = 325), with 69 PLHIV from Wakiso.

Fig 2. Study Participant Flow Diagram.

Fig 2

Table 3. Demographic characteristics of PLHIV participating in the formative study at selected HIV clinics in Kampala and Wakiso districts.

Variable Overall(n = 394) Kampala(n = 325) Wakiso (n = 69) p-value
Female sex 300 (76.1) 246 (75.7) 54 (78.3) 0.649
Median age (IQR)a 52 (44, 59) 52 (45, 59) 53 (42, 60) 0.751
Distance to clinic(kms) (KmKmsKm (KM) 8 (4, 15) 8 (5, 16) 5 (3, 10) 0.003
Education level
No formal education 37 (9.4) 31 (9.5) 6 (8.7) 0.556
Primary 202 (51.3) 168 (51.7) 34 (49.3)
Secondary 121 (30.7) 101 (31.1) 20 (29)
Post-secondary 34 (8.6) 25 (7.7) 9 (13)
Marital status
Married/Cohabiting 130 (33) 105 (32.3) 25 (36.2) 0.167
Single/widowed 141 (35.8) 123 (37.8) 18 (26.1)
Divorced 123 (31.2) 97 (29.9) 26 (37.7)
Occupation
Formally employed 60 (15.2) 51 (15.7) 9 (13) 0.356
Self-employed 172 (43.7) 148 (45.5) 24 (34.8)
Peasant farmer 29 (7.4) 23 (7.1) 6 (8.7)
Unemployed 118 (30) 91 (28) 27 (39.1)
Other 15 (3.8) 12 (3.7) 2 (4.4)

aWilcoxon rank sum test, Categorical variables – Chi-square test.

Knowledge and beliefs about hypertension.

The analysis of PLHIV knowledge revealed notable gaps, particularly in understanding the etiology and clinical thresholds associated with HTN. Awareness surrounding hypertension-related risk factors, diagnosis, treatment, and complications was found to be insufficient among PLHIV. The level of knowledge among PLHIV regarding clinical thresholds for diagnosing hypertension was low. Only 32% of PLHIV correctly identified the systolic BP threshold of 140 mmHg for diagnosing hypertension (HTN), while 24.1% accurately identified the diastolic BP threshold of 90 mmHg. Despite these significant gaps in diagnostic knowledge, most participants, PLHIV (86.8%) acknowledged that hypertension is treatable, and 62% understood that lifelong management is required for those diagnosed with the condition (Table 4).

Table 4. PLHIV knowledge about HTN diagnosis, treatment, monitoring and complications.
Variable Overall (n = 394) Kampala (n = 325) Wakiso (n = 69) p value
Threshold systolic BP
80 – 140 mmHg 126 (32) 110 (33.9) 16 (23.2) 0.085
Others 268 (68) 215 (66.1) 53 (76.8)
Threshold normal diastolic BP
60 -90 mmHg 95 (24.1) 81 (24.9) 14 (20.3) 0.414
Others 299 (75.9) 244 (75.1) 55 (79.7)
Can high BP be treated?
Yes 342 (86.8) 282 (86.8) 60 (87) 0.574
No
No
13 (3.3) 12(3.7) 1 (1.4)
I don’t know 39 (9.9) 31 (9.5) 8 (11.6)
Duration of taking anti-HTN medicines (n = 342)
For life 212 (62) 173 (61.3) 39 (65) 0.636
Does not know 96 (28.1) 82 (29.1) 14 (23.3)
Only when BP is high/abnormal 34 (9.9) 27 (9.6) 7 (11.7)
HTN damages body organs.
Yes 344 (87.3) 282 (86.8) 62 (89.9)
No 21 (5.3) 16 (4.9) 5 (7.2)
Does not know 29 (7.4) 27 (8.3) 2 (2.9)
Body Organs damaged by HTN
Brain 156 (39.6) 125 (38.5) 31 (44.9) 0.319
Eye 83 (21.1) 62 (19.1) 21 (30.4) 0.036
Heart 132 (33.5) 105 (32.3) 27 (39.1) 0.275
Kidneys 27 (6.9) 23 (7.1) 4 (5.8) 0.702
Others 5 (1.3) 4 (1.2) 1 (1.4) 0.883

In addition to quantitative data, qualitative interviews provided further insight into PLHIV beliefs about hypertension. PLHIV frequently attributed hypertension to stress induced by life challenges and identified physical symptoms, such as increased heart rate, headaches, weakness, and insomnia, as indicative of the condition. One PLHIV articulated their perception of hypertension as follows:

“….. it causes constant heartbeat, headache, feeling weak. I believe your BP rises when dealing with life’s problems. You may get a headache or sometimes feel dizzy” (Male, 56 years). Other PLHIV also described symptoms such as palpitations and difficulty in breathing as associated with hypertension.

Attitudes toward hypertension screening, treatment and monitoring.

Most PLHIV strongly supported regular blood pressure (BP) checkups and recognized the importance of lifestyle modifications in preventing hypertension. However, misconceptions about HTN were prevalent. A significant proportion (90%) believed that hypertension always presents with symptoms, despite its frequently asymptomatic nature. Additionally, two thirds (66%) of PLHIV expressed belief in the efficacy of herbal treatments, and 42% considered it acceptable to discontinue antihypertensive medications in the absence of symptoms (Fig 3).

Fig 3. Attitudes towards HTN diagnosis, risk factors and complications among PLHIV with HTN receiving HIV care in Kampala and Wakiso districts.

Fig 3

During in-depth interviews, PLHIV acknowledged the critical need for routine BP screenings to monitor their condition and prevent complications. One PLHIV highlighted the dangers of undiagnosed and uncontrolled hypertension.

“You may get a stroke: you may have uncontrolled (high) BP, which will affect your eyes…you may lose a limb through amputation, so it is important for us to be screened because it is difficult to know you have it until you are screened.” (Female, 49 years)

Despite this awareness, findings indicate gaps in comprehensive PLHIV’s education regarding hypertension management and the necessity of continuous treatment adherence. While PLHIV expressed positive attitudes toward BP monitoring and lifestyle modifications, concerns about polypharmacy and potential long-term effects of antihypertensive medication were prevalent. One PLHIV shared concerns about excessive medication use:

“However, we were also told that having a lot of medication in one’s body could lead to cancer. I got scared, and now I do not take the [anti-HTN] pill consistently. I may take the medication on one day and skip two days.” (Female, 58 years)

Adverse effects of medication also emerged as a major factor hindering adherence. Many PLHIV described experiencing side effects such as dizziness and fatigue, which deterred consistent medication use. One PLHIV noted:

“When you take medication for high BP, you become very weak. The tablets [antihypertensive medicines] make you weak; you feel dizzy. They cause dizziness, you feel weak, and your whole body gets weak.” (Female, 42 years)

These findings suggest that the perceived and actual side effects of antihypertensive medications contribute to inconsistent adherence, potentially compromising effective hypertension management. Fear of long-term medication side effects, such as cancer further compounded adherence challenges, highlighting the need for targeted interventions to address misinformation and enhance PLHIV support.

Outer setting

Patient needs and resources.

The study examined PLHIV needs and the extent to which barriers and facilitators to meeting those needs were recognized and prioritized. Findings indicate that that HTN services within HIV clinics were not prioritized, contributing to significant gaps in care. Routine blood pressure screening was infrequent, limiting early detection and management of hypertension, while inadequate access to anti-hypertensive medications further impeded PLHIV care.

Only 44% of PLHIV, when asked about the last time they had their blood pressure checked, reported having had it checked within the last seven days, while 24% were screened between eight and thirty days prior. Notably, PLHIV from urban clinics were more likely to receive hypertension treatment compared to those from peri-urban clinics (64.3% vs. 47.8%, p = 0.003) (Table 5).

Table 5. PLHIV’s practices regarding HTN diagnosis, treatment, monitoring and screening.
Overall(n = 394) Kampala (n = 325) Wakiso (n = 69) p value
Last BP measurement
Last 7 days 173 (43.9) 152 (46.8) 21 (30.4) 0.089
8- 30 days 96 (24.4) 74 (22.8) 22 (31.9)
31- 120 days 58 (14.7) 45 (13.8) 13 (18.8)
121 days 67 (17) 54 (16.6) 13 (18.8)
Frequency of taking anti-HTN medications
Daily 242 (61.4) 209 (64.3) 33 (47.8) 0.003
Weekly 5 (1.3) 4 (1.2) 1 (1.4)
When I feel unwell 70 (17.7) 47 (14.5) 23 (33.3)
Others 77 (19.5) 65 (20) 12 (17.4)
Assessed for HTN-induced complications
I have never been assessed 317 (80.5) 263 (80.9) 54 (78.3) 0.061
Monthly 10 (2.5) 9 (2.8) 1 (1.4)
Every three months 12 (3.1) 11 (3.4) 1 (1.4)
Every six months 7 (1.8) 7 (2.1) 0
Every 12 months 40 (10.1) 27 (8.3) 13 (18.8)
Does not know 8 (2) 8 (2.5) 0 (0)

Qualitative findings revealed PLHIV challenges in accessing hypertension care, primarily due to the inadequacy of services provided at HIV clinics. Routine BP screening, medication management, and clinical monitoring were often lacking, leading to fragmented care experiences. One PLHIV described this issue:

“They [healthcare providers] do not measure our BP. I have never received any serious advice concerning HTN.” (Female, 52 years)

This indicates that systematic monitoring and management of hypertension were not routinely integrated into HIV care settings, potentially compromising PLHIV outcomes. PLHIV with hypertension were frequently referred to other service points either within or outside the facility, further exacerbating fragmentation. One PLHIV explained:

“There are no efforts to provide treatment within this HIV clinic apart from advising you to seek treatment for HTN privately.” (Female, 54 years)

The referral process increased the burden on PLHIV, leading to delays in treatment and inadequate continuity of care.

A major barrier to hypertension management was the unavailability of antihypertensive medications at public healthcare facilities, forcing PLHIV to seek medications privately. However, private clinics often charged prices beyond PLHIV’s financial means, as described by one PLHIV:

“At this clinic, we do not receive any treatment for HTN. Once your BP is measured, you are often advised to go and buy antihypertensive medications privately, but the medicines are expensive.” (Female, 35 years)

The high cost of antihypertensive medications significantly impeded adherence, leading PLHIV to ration medications. One PLHIV stated:

“I may skip two days without taking [antihypertensive] medication, and when I can afford it, I resume.” (Female, 58 years)

Medication rationing compromises treatment efficacy and exacerbates hypertension progression, increasing the risk of adverse long-term health outcomes.

PLHIV reported a lack of BP screening services and counseling on hypertension management, primarily due to insufficient staffing at HIV clinics. Many advocated for improvements including better access to BP machines and integrated care services. One PLHIV emphasized:

“I request that more staff manage HTN, more effort [towards] screening clients for HTN. I would also like that whenever I come to the clinic, my BP is checked and I am given treatment, have all [HIV, HTN] services provided at once, and all medicines given at once.” (Female, 49 years)

The findings highlight the need for a streamlined and comprehensive approach to managing both HIV and hypertension to improve PLHIV access and promote better health outcomes.

Intervention characteristics

Perceived relative advantage and adaptability.

Our findings highlight two key constructs within the CFIR domain of intervention characteristics; relative advantage and adaptability.

PLHIV perceived the integration of hypertension care within HIV services as a more beneficial alternative to the current fragmented and disjointed care models. They also expressed confidence that hypertension management could be successfully incorporated into existing HIV infrastructure, offering both logistical and financial benefits.

PLHIV identified several advantages of integrating HTN and HIV services, particularly in mitigating barriers related to fragmented care and the high cost of antihypertensive medications. A primary benefit emphasized was the convenience of receiving both treatments within a single visit, which would reduce logistical challenges and financial strain. As one PLHIV stated:

“For a hypertensive person, it helps when your BP is measured, and you get to know your status whether it is controlled or not. The other issue is access to medicine: in most cases we come here, and we don’t find the [antihypertensive] medicines.” (Female, 26 years)

This sentiment underscores dissatisfaction with the current model, where the unavailability of antihypertensive medications at HIV clinics disrupts continuity of care. PLHIV highlighted that integrating HTN services within HIV care would minimize the time spent seeking treatment, improve medication access, and lower financial burdens. The ability to simultaneously obtain ART and antihypertensive medications was particularly valued. One PLHIV explained:

“I would be very happy if I can get both ART and antihypertensive medicines at the same time. This would mean I only spend one day to get everything I need. This would be best for me.” (Female, 59 years)

This preference for a consolidated care model suggests that integrating HTN management into HIV services could significantly enhance PLHIV adherence and overall health outcomes. In addition to convenience, PLHIV highlighted the potential financial benefits of integrating HTN and HIV care. They emphasized that consolidating clinic visits would reduce transportation costs and other expenses associated with seeking care at multiple locations. One PLHIV noted:

“The benefit of [HTN-HIV] is that one does not have to travel several times to the facility. For example, if I come on my clinic day, my BP is measured, and treatment is received, it would greatly benefit me.” (Female, 49 years)

This finding suggests that integrating services could improve financial accessibility, particularly for individuals with limited resources who struggle with transportation costs and clinic fees.

PLHIV also emphasized the feasibility of integrating HTN care into existing HIV service delivery models, particularly by aligning hypertension management with established HIV care structures such as differentiated service delivery models – multi-month dispensing and community based services. The majority expressed a preference for synchronized refills of antihypertensive medications alongside their HIV treatment, as illustrated by one PLHIV’s recommendation:

“Let the treatment [antihypertensive medication] be given to us at once: a package for 3 months – [high blood] pressure [medicines for] 3 months, diabetes [medicines for] 3 months, HIV [medicines for] 3 months – and you know that after the 3 months, I will go back to the hospital.” (Male, 54 years)

The preference for synchronized medication refills highlights the need for a streamlines, efficient care process that reduces the frequency of clinic visits while ensuring uninterrupted treatment adherence. Furthermore, PLHIV emphasized the importance of addressing transportation challenges and making healthcare services more accessible. One PLHIV explained:

“Some of us clients don’t have transport to come to the clinic. We shall benefit in the way that HIV clients – they have thought about us – to bring us treatment for other conditions nearby, rather than coming today for one condition and another day for another condition. So from here, we shall get good services.” (Female, 38 years)

This perspective underscores the need for integrated care models that reduce logistical barriers, particularly for individuals managing multiple chronic conditions. Additionally, financial constraints were identified as a significant barrier to full treatment access, as illustrated by one PLHIV’s concern:

“I think it would be good if we collectively receive treatment. Sometimes when we do not get medicines, we find that we do not have money or can only make a partial payment, and then we find that we have not received full treatment. That is the only problem,” (Female, 46 years)

Discussion

This study assessed PLHIV’s knowledge, attitudes, and practices regarding hypertension and hypertension management and identified key barriers affecting the integration of HTN and HIV services. It highlights the need for PLHIV-level interventions to optimize HTN management within HIV clinics, as PLHIV demonstrated significant gaps in understanding HTN, including its causes, treatment, and self-management. These gaps hindered PLHIV engagement and adherence, underscoring the importance of education and awareness in successful integrated care.

Building on prior research, the study suggests leveraging HIV infrastructure for HTN education, a strategy shown to improve adherence and awareness in other African contexts, such as Kenya [22]. In sub-Saharan Africa, HIV care infrastructure has often incorporated robust health education components, often facilitated by peer support programs that offer both education and emotional support [23]. This study builds upon this evidence, showing that leveraging the existing HIV infrastructure for HTN education could be a promising strategy; training HIV care providers in HTN management is crucial for improving PLHIV education and self-management practices, especially among older PLHIV, who often face compounded challenges with multiple chronic conditions. Previous studies emphasize the pivotal role of provider knowledge and communication skills in chronic disease management, influencing both adherence and clinical outcomes. Our study corroborates previous research on aging with HIV and underscores the need to leverage HIV programs to provide services to older adults living with HIV who are most susceptible to co-morbidities specifically in low and middle income countries like Uganda [24]. The study also identified inconsistent access to affordable antihypertensive medications as a major barrier. While public health facilities offer free medications, stock-outs force PLHIV to purchase them privately, presenting a significant challenge in low-resource settings [25]. Addressing medication affordability and availability, particularly for older PLHIV who may be more financially vulnerable, is essential for effective integrated care. Research indicates that older adults in low-resource settings often experience difficulties accessing comprehensive care due to age-related vulnerabilities, including polypharmacy and the burden of managing multiple health conditions [26,7].

Financial constraints were also identified as a barrier, particularly for older PLHIV who struggle with the costs of healthcare, including clinic visits, travel, and medications. The study suggests a model that reduces economic burdens on PLHIV, particularly older adults managing multiple chronic conditions. Research in Uganda and low-resource settings has shown similar cost-related challenges in managing chronic diseases such as diabetes and rheumatic heart disease [27].

Aligning hypertension (HTN) care with existing differentiated service delivery (DSD) models for HIV care could reduce clinic visit frequency and enhance service utilization, particularly for older PLHIV. Effective integration is crucial, as DSD models—widely implemented across Africa for clinically stable ART clients—have proven beneficial in promoting client-centered care by adapting service delivery to meet individual needs (30). During the COVID-19 pandemic, community-based ART distribution models were strengthened to maintain continuity of care outside of health facilities [28]. PLHIV in our study emphasized the need for HTN services to be adapted similarly, allowing for synchronized medical refills and reduced visit frequency. Such alignment could enhance service utilization, reduce the risk of treatment interruptions, and improve health outcomes for PLHIV managing both HIV and HTN.

In summary, integrating HTN and HIV care emerged as a promising model, offering benefits in accessibility, cost savings, and convenience for PLHIV. The adaptability of this model within the existing HIV care infrastructure highlights potential synergies in treatment delivery that could address both logistical and financial barriers to care. Integrating HTN care with existing DSD models, ensuring a consistent medication supply, and enhancing PLHIV education can improve medication adherence, reduce transportation costs, and address the broader challenges of chronic disease management in under-resourced health systems. Given the growing burden of non-communicable diseases among aging PLHIV in Uganda, implementing integrated service models that cater to their unique healthcare needs is increasingly imperative. Future research should explore the long-term impact of integration on clinical outcomes and client retention, particularly among older PLHIV who face additional socioeconomic and health-related vulnerabilities.

Strengths of this study

Our study employed both quantitative and qualitative methods to examine the implementation determinants of integrated hypertension and HIV care from the perspective of PLHIV. The robust sample size enabled precise estimates and meaningful comparisons across the two districts. Additionally, the inclusion of a diverse range of clinics—spanning small and large private not-for-profit and public facilities—enhances the generalizability of our findings compared to previous studies. These findings provide critical insights into the gaps and implementation challenges that must be addressed to integrate HTN care into HIV clinic settings effectively.

Limitations

The study had some limitations. The formative assessment was only carried out in urban and peri-urban areas of Kampala and Wakiso districts. These facilities may not necessarily represent the characteristics of rural communities that could be more limited in resources. However, other interventions primarily conducted in urban and peri-urban settings have been successfully implemented on a broader scale [29,30].

Conclusion

Integrating hypertension services into HIV clinics in Uganda presents a critical opportunity to enhance chronic disease management by addressing key barriers such as knowledge gaps, inconsistent medication access, and fragmented care delivery. Effective integration will require coordinated efforts among policymakers, healthcare providers, and community stakeholders to develop a cohesive, PLHIV-centered models that optimize service delivery that supports dual management of HIV and HTN within resource-constrained settings. Additionally, incorporating structural health education on comorbidities into routine HIV care is essential for improving PLHIV awareness, engagement, and adherence to hypertension management. The findings from this study provide evidence-based guidance for designing targeted integration strategies that address PLHIV-specific challenges including financial constraints and misalignment of services, ultimately strengthening the healthcare system’s capacity to manage the dual burden of HIV and hypertension. Furthermore, these insights underscore the importance of incorporating health education on comorbidities into routine HIV care to foster PLHIV’s understanding and engagement. This study’s findings informed targeted strategies to integrate HTN care into HIV settings, focusing on PLHIV-specific barriers such as knowledge deficits, financial constraints, and service misalignment.

Contributions to the literature

  • This study identified the importance of PLHIV level implementation determinants to deliver PLHIV centered care through integrated HTN and HIV services in Uganda

  • This study illustrates the need to identify and leverage existing HIV infrastructure and resources as a pathway to optimizing non-communicable disease care for an aging PLHIV population in resource limited settings like Uganda

  • Findings identified through this study have been utilized to develop a multi-component intervention to optimize integration of HTN care into the HIV program. The intervention is being implemented in a stepped wedge cluster randomized control trial across 16 HIV clinics in Uganda

Supporting information

S1 Text. KAP Survey Questionnaire.

(DOCX)

pgph.0004701.s001.docx (512.1KB, docx)
S2 Text. Indepth Interview Guide.

(DOCX)

pgph.0004701.s002.docx (20.9KB, docx)
S1 Checklist. COREQ Checklist.

(DOCX)

pgph.0004701.s003.docx (16KB, docx)

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank all the research participants who agreed to participate in this study. The authors acknowledge the support of the Ministry of Health in Uganda, Wakiso District Local Government and Kampala Capital City Authority, which granted access for researchers to engage with participants receiving HIV and HTN care from health facilities within their jurisdiction. The authors acknowledge the Makerere University Behavioral and Social Science Research (Mak-BSSR) programme which is funded by the National Institutes for Health (NIH), National Institutes of Health on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA), National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH), and Fogarty International Center (FIC), Grant number: D43TW011304 (Kamya, Camlin, and Katahoire) under which Florence Ayebare (Corresponding author) is a trainee.

Data Availability

Data reported in this manuscript are publicly available at Harvard Dataverse at the following url: https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/Z1MLGQ.

Funding Statement

The National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute (NHLBI) of the National Institutes of Health (https://www.nhlbi.nih.gov) funded this study (UG3HL154501 awarded to authors FCS and CTL). The funders did not influence the study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or the preparation of the manuscript.

References

  • 1.Feinstein MJ, Hsue PY, Benjamin LA, Bloomfield GS, Currier JS, Freiberg MS, et al. Characteristics, Prevention, and Management of Cardiovascular Disease in People Living With HIV: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2019;140(2):e98–124. doi: 10.1161/CIR.0000000000000695 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Freiberg MS, Chang C-CH, Skanderson M, Patterson OV, DuVall SL, Brandt CA, et al. Association Between HIV Infection and the Risk of Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction and Preserved Ejection Fraction in the Antiretroviral Therapy Era: Results From the Veterans Aging Cohort Study. JAMA Cardiol. 2017;2(5):536–46. doi: 10.1001/jamacardio.2017.0264 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Chow FC, Regan S, Feske S, Meigs JB, Grinspoon SK, Triant VA. Comparison of ischemic stroke incidence in HIV-infected and non-HIV-infected patients in a US health care system. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2012;60(4):351–8. doi: 10.1097/QAI.0b013e31825c7f24 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Freiberg MS, Chang C-CH, Kuller LH, Skanderson M, Lowy E, Kraemer KL, et al. HIV infection and the risk of acute myocardial infarction. JAMA Intern Med. 2013;173(8):614–22. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2013.3728 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Guwatudde D, Mutungi G, Wesonga R, Kajjura R, Kasule H, Muwonge J, et al. The Epidemiology of Hypertension in Uganda: Findings from the National Non-Communicable Diseases Risk Factor Survey. PLoS One. 2015;10(9):e0138991. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0138991 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Schatz E, Seeley J, Negin J, Mugisha J. They ‘don’t cure old age’: older Ugandans’ delays to health-care access. Ageing and Society. 2017;38(11):2197–217. doi: 10.1017/s0144686x17000502 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Maciel RA, Klück HM, Durand M, Sprinz E. Comorbidity is more common and occurs earlier in persons living with HIV than in HIV-uninfected matched controls, aged 50 years and older: A cross-sectional study. Int J Infect Dis. 2018;70:30–5. doi: 10.1016/j.ijid.2018.02.009 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Chang AY, Gómez-Olivé FX, Payne C, Rohr JK, Manne-Goehler J, Wade AN, et al. Chronic multimorbidity among older adults in rural South Africa. BMJ Glob Health. 2019;4(4):e001386. doi: 10.1136/bmjgh-2018-001386 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Muddu M, Tusubira AK, Sharma SK, Akiteng AR, Ssinabulya I, Schwartz JI. Integrated Hypertension and HIV Care Cascades in an HIV Treatment Program in Eastern Uganda: A Retrospective Cohort Study. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2019;81(5):552–61. doi: 10.1097/QAI.0000000000002067 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Muddu M, Semitala FC, Kimera I, Mbuliro M, Ssennyonjo R, Kigozi SP, et al. Improved hypertension control at six months using an adapted WHO HEARTS-based implementation strategy at a large urban HIV clinic in Uganda. BMC Health Serv Res. 2022;22(1):699. doi: 10.1186/s12913-022-08045-8 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Alliance H-SGR. Improving healthcare for people living with HIV through implementation science. HLB-SIMPLe; 2024. [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Damschroder LJ, Aron DC, Keith RE, Kirsh SR, Alexander JA, Lowery JC. Fostering implementation of health services research findings into practice: a consolidated framework for advancing implementation science. Implement Sci. 2009;4:50. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-4-50 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Fetters MD, Curry LA, Creswell JW. Achieving integration in mixed methods designs-principles and practices. Health Serv Res. 2013;48(6 Pt 2):2134–56. doi: 10.1111/1475-6773.12117 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Kalyesubula R, Kayongo A, Semitala FC, Muhanguzi A, Katantazi N, Ayers D, et al. Trends and level of control of hypertension among adults attending an ambulatory HIV clinic in Kampala, Uganda: a retrospective study. BMJ Glob Health. 2016;1(3):e000055. doi: 10.1136/bmjgh-2016-000055 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Guest G, Namey E, Chen M. A simple method to assess and report thematic saturation in qualitative research. PLoS One. 2020;15(5):e0232076. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0232076 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Harris PA, Taylor R, Thielke R, Payne J, Gonzalez N, Conde JG. Research electronic data capture (REDCap)--a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. J Biomed Inform. 2009;42(2):377–81. doi: 10.1016/j.jbi.2008.08.010 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Harris PA, Taylor R, Minor BL, Elliott V, Fernandez M, O’Neal L, et al. The REDCap consortium: Building an international community of software platform partners. J Biomed Inform. 2019;95:103208. doi: 10.1016/j.jbi.2019.103208 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Mortelmans D. Analyzing qualitative data using NVivo. In Van den Bulck H, Uppis M, Donders K, Van Audenhive L. (eds) The Palgrave handbook of methods for media policy research. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham; 2019. p. 435–450. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-16065-4_25 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Allsop DB, Chelladurai JM, Kimball ER, Marks LD, Hendricks JJ. Qualitative Methods with Nvivo Software: A Practical Guide for Analyzing Qualitative Data. Psych. 2022;4(2):142–59. doi: 10.3390/psych4020013 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Guba EG. Criteria for assessing the trustworthiness of naturalistic inquiries. Ect J. 1981;29(2):75–91. [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Tong A, Sainsbury P, Craig J. Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. Int J Qual Health Care. 2007;19(6):349–57. doi: 10.1093/intqhc/mzm042 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Wekesah FM, Mutua MK, Boateng D, Grobbee DE, Asiki G, Kyobutungi CK, et al. Comparative performance of pooled cohort equations and Framingham risk scores in cardiovascular disease risk classification in a slum setting in Nairobi Kenya. Int J Cardiol Heart Vasc. 2020;28:100521. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcha.2020.100521 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Odeny TA, Penner J, Lewis-Kulzer J, Leslie HH, Shade SB, Adero W, et al. Integration of HIV Care with Primary Health Care Services: Effect on Patient Satisfaction and Stigma in Rural Kenya. AIDS Res Treat. 2013;2013:485715. doi: 10.1155/2013/485715 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Moyo-Chilufya M, Maluleke K, Kgarosi K, Muyoyeta M, Hongoro C, Musekiwa A. The burden of non-communicable diseases among people living with HIV in Sub-Saharan Africa: a systematic review and meta-analysis. EClinicalMedicine. 2023;65:102255. doi: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2023.102255 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Atun R, Jaffar S, Nishtar S, Knaul FM, Barreto ML, Nyirenda M, et al. Improving responsiveness of health systems to non-communicable diseases. Lancet. 2013;381(9867):690–7. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(13)60063-X [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Negin J, Nyirenda M, Seeley J, Mutevedzi P. Inequality in health status among older adults in Africa: the surprising impact of anti-retroviral treatment. J Cross Cult Gerontol. 2013;28(4):491–3. doi: 10.1007/s10823-013-9215-4 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Opara CC, Du Y, Kawakatsu Y, Atala J, Beaton AZ, Kansiime R, et al. Household Economic Consequences of Rheumatic Heart Disease in Uganda. Front Cardiovasc Med. 2021;8:636280. doi: 10.3389/fcvm.2021.636280 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Wilkinson L, Grimsrud A. The time is now: expedited HIV differentiated service delivery during the COVID-19 pandemic. J Int AIDS Soc. 2020;23(5):e25503. doi: 10.1002/jia2.25503 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Kwarisiima D, Atukunda M, Owaraganise A, Chamie G, Clark T, Kabami J, et al. Hypertension control in integrated HIV and chronic disease clinics in Uganda in the SEARCH study. BMC Public Health. 2019;19(1):511. doi: 10.1186/s12889-019-6838-6 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Heller DJ, Balzer LB, Kazi D, Charlebois ED, Kwarisiima D, Mwangwa F, et al. Hypertension testing and treatment in Uganda and Kenya through the SEARCH study: An implementation fidelity and outcome evaluation. PLoS One. 2020;15(1):e0222801. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0222801 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
PLOS Glob Public Health. doi: 10.1371/journal.pgph.0004701.r002

Decision Letter 0

Jepchirchir Kiplagat

PGPH-D-24-01877

Harnessing HIV clinics to deliver integrated hypertension care for People living with HIV in Uganda: A mixed methods study.

PLOS Global Public Health

Dear Dr. Ayebare,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS Global Public Health. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS Global Public Health’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

EDITOR: 

  • Address typographic errors noticed in several sections of the document

  • Prior to using an abbreviation, spell it out in full. For example, first use of PLHIV in the introduction section is not spelt out

Please submit your revised manuscript by Nov 25 2024 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at globalpubhealth@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pgph/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Jepchirchir Kiplagat, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS Global Public Health

Journal Requirements:

1. Please amend your detailed Financial Disclosure statement. This is published with the article. It must therefore be completed in full sentences and contain the exact wording you wish to be published.

**Please only choose the relevant sentences from below**

1. Please clarify all sources of funding (financial or material support) for your study. List the grants (with grant number) or organizations (with url) that supported your study, including funding received from your institution. 

2. State the initials, alongside each funding source, of each author to receive each grant.

3. State what role the funders took in the study. If the funders had no role in your study, please state: “The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.”

4. If any authors received a salary from any of your funders, please state which authors and which funders.

2. In the online submission form, you indicated that "The datasets used/analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.". 

All PLOS journals now require all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript to be freely available to other researchers, either 

1. In a public repository, 

2. Within the manuscript itself, or 

3. Uploaded as supplementary information.

This policy applies to all data except where public deposition would breach compliance with the protocol approved by your research ethics board. If your data cannot be made publicly available for ethical or legal reasons (e.g., public availability would compromise patient privacy), please explain your reasons by return email and your exemption request will be escalated to the editor for approval. Your exemption request will be handled independently and will not hold up the peer review process, but will need to be resolved should your manuscript be accepted for publication. One of the Editorial team will then be in touch if there are any issues.

3. Please upload a copy of Figures which you refer to in your manuscript. Or, if the figure is no longer to be included as part of the submission please remove all reference to it within the text.

Please provide separate figure files in .tif or .eps format.

For more information about figure files please see our guidelines:

https://journals.plos.org/globalpublichealth/s/figures 

https://journals.plos.org/globalpublichealth/s/figures#loc-file-requirements 

4. We have noticed that you have uploaded Supporting Information files, but you have not included a list of legends. Please add a full list of legends for your Supporting Information files after the references list. 

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Does this manuscript meet PLOS Global Public Health’s publication criteria? Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions? The manuscript must describe methodologically and ethically rigorous research with conclusions that are appropriately drawn based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Partly

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available (please refer to the Data Availability Statement at the start of the manuscript PDF file)?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception. The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS Global Public Health does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: Overall: An interesting and very timely analysis that supports previous findings about barriers to successful implementation of hypertension programming in sSA.

What is the integration model used here at systems and program level? Please describe it in the introduction. Often we say programs are ‘integrated’ without providing necessary detail to understand the integration model. Here, please tell us what systems are integrated (unified supply chain? Does the EMR record both HTN and HIV data? Does the same cadre or health care workers screen and diagnose both diseases? Lab integration?) and what program elements are integrated in this model (coordinated pharmacy pickups for ART and HTN meds? Multimonth dispensing of both types of medications? Differentiated service delivery options for both ART and HTN meds? Same clinic space for both services? Same clinical provider for both services? Same provider gives lifetstyle/behavioral counseling? etc). Were integration models for HTN/HIV different at the public and private hospitals that you surveyed? How? How might these different models have impacted client survey responses?

Introduction:

Nice review of relevant literature. Clear explanation of how this current study fits into recent and ongoing pilot studies this group is doing with HIV/HTN integration.

Line 72-73: reference?

Line 72: please explain the difference between hypertension and high blood pressure?

Line 74-75: reference?

Line 78: “all PLHIV”: is there an age cutoff at which BP screening should start in these guidelines? Usually age 18 and older- would specify here

Line 79-80: “PLHIV who are diagnosed with HTN should receive integrated services for both HTN and HIV”. What is specifically meant by ‘integrated services’ here? Do the Ugandan guidelines specify or define the term ‘integration’ or a particular integration model(s)? Throughout this paper, the only integration model referred to is integrating NCDs into HIV care.

Line 82-83: “However, for successful combined health outcomes for HTN-HIV, it is crucial to follow these guidelines.” This sounds like an advocacy statement. Consider rephrasing to indicate that existing barriers to HTN and HIV integration may limit efficacy of HTN programs.

Line 93: It seems this work is part of the PULESA Uganda study? I would devote a paragraph in the introduction to explaining the PULESA work/findings/integration model to date, and how this current study fits in.

Line 107: would remove “for example data collection tools were developed based on the CFIR 2009” as this is already explained in lines 104-105

Line 109: “integrated model”: still unclear what this integrated model actually entails.

Line 109-112: “Following analysis, the team agreed that the following 110 constructs were relevant for the study to develop strategies to address patient level gaps to inform intervention components for patient centered care in the larger Trial.” Consider moving to Discussion as it is not relevant in the Introduction.

Line 113-114: “We used the CFIR framework to identify implementation

114 determinants to improve HTN care within the HIV program.” Consider moving this to the topic sentence of the paragraph

Methods:

Very detailed and well thought-out section. Study design is clearly explained.

Line 121-122: “and perceptions toward HTN in the context of HIV and integrated HIV-HTN care.” this reads awkwardly, consider rephrasing

Line 128: “three hospitals”: what type of hospitals - national, regional, district?

Line 140: rather than ‘we enrolled all PLHIV’, consider ‘we identified PLHIV’ through consecutive sampling. Because likely not all of those identified were enrolled, as likely some did not provide informed consent or agree to participate. Please present data of all the clients you identified as eligible, how many decided to enroll?

Line 161: how were the targeted sample sizes for each facility chosen?

Line 213: Figure 1 is terrific

Line 221: Table 3: Distance from home to clinic: Please specify the unit of measurement

Results: Comparing survey outcomes from clients at public vs. private facilities would be interesting as the integration models at these two facilities likely differ; consider adding this analysis.

Line 236-239: consider clarifying these two sentences as they seem to be a bit redundant.

Lines 249: “We identified patient needs and resources as a key barrier to integration of hypertension into HIV care.” I don’t understand the thinking here. Is the ‘patient need’ the need to have blood pressure checked very frequently? This is not consistent with evidence-based guidelines. What is the “patient resource” identified here? How do these needs (or resources?) act as a barrier to integration?

Line 254-257: How often should clients have their blood pressure checked to quality as ‘optimal hypertension care’? It’s unclear to me why this paper is suggesting that having a blood pressure checked within ‘the last seven days’ constitutes optimal care. I doubt the Ugandan national guidelines recommend blood pressure checks this frequently for hypetensive clients. Do these clients have home blood pressure cuffs?

Line 264: it would help to have some background on what the integration models are in these various care settings. For example, some ‘integrated’ models have hypertension screening in the ART clinic but then refer to NCD clinics or OPD for hypertension treatment. This client’s report of outside referrals for HTN care could be a critique of the integration model itself, rather than a critique that the HIV clinic is providing inadequate services.

Line 271: ‘exorbitant’ is subjective: would provide actual prices and show (rather than tell) that these prices are very high, or would state ‘private clinics allegedly sold these medications at prices that caused financial difficulties for patients”.

Line 315: “Wakiso district had a significantly higher score of 28.6 compared to Kampala district with a score of 26.1.” Was this difference statistically significant? If so, please provide a p value. If not, remove modifier ‘significantly’.

Line 317: same comment for ‘significantly’

Line 318: FIgure 3: I cannot tell which box plot corresponds to which score. Please label this figure more clearly and label Y axes. Only one of these 4 box plots has a significant P value - which score does this correspond to?

Discussion:

Line 374: “These findings suggest that strengthening and integrating HTN care services is critical to overcoming these barrier”. It seems to me that integration is but one answer for the patient level concerns you have identified. For example, ‘integration’ per se will not ensure that blood pressure medications are free or well-stocked at the HIV pharmacy. ‘Integration’ does not ensure that HIV clinical staff is well-trained in hypertension counseling, screening, and treatment. You need alternate funding models (increased government or donor support? National health insurance fund? Revolving fund pharmacies? etc), supply chain support for antihypertensives, increased support for HRH through training and task-shifting, hypertension screening and education in the community (ie not only facility-based) etc. Is hypertension treatment streamlined with simplified treatment algorhythms of a few antihypertensive medications and policies that permit task-shifting and nurse-prescribing? Overcoming these barriers is more complex than ‘strengthening integration’. Please be more nuanced about your recommendations. It is not accurate to suggest that an unspecified model of ‘integration’ will fix these barriers.

Line 431-432: reference?

Conclusion:

Line 437-438: “To address these gaps, health education for co-morbidities with HIV should be routinely integrated into HIV care.” This is a bit sparse for a conclusion. Perhaps circle back to how this study fits into the larger PULESA framework and what future and ongoing work consists of.

Reviewer #2: This paper has the potential to make an important contribution in the area of overlap in the need for care among adults/older adults living with HIV and hypertension (or other NCDs) in sub-Saharan Africa. The front end of the paper is very well written and clearly outlines the issues that need attention. The paper makes use of a unique and rich data source from Uganda that includes both survey data and qualitative interviews with individuals seeking care for HIV, who also have HTN (or are at risk for HTN). As is clearly pointed out, despite there being a policy for HIV-NCD care integration, the reality on the ground is that this is not the experience that most patients in these hospitals/clinics experience. Using a well-established framework Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), the authors aim to offer the experience of patients in these settings, and use these findings to outline recommendations.

The authors allude to benefits of the mixed-methods design that they use. Similar designs have been called - data-linked nested studies - and some of the ways to take advantage of the unique added value of the data are outlined here: Schatz E. 2012. Rationale and procedures for nesting semi-structured interviews in surveys or censuses. Population Studies 66(2): 183–95. https://doi.org/10.1080/00324728.2012.658851.

The findings and recommendations align well with other work from sub-Saharan Africa, and Uganda, that have looked at similar issues. However, the presentation of the findings - both quantitative and qualitative could be improved to make a stronger case for the underlying story or narrative that the authors are aiming to share. Currently the results part of the paper reads more like a report than an academic paper, with the data under analyzed and simply presented for the reader to interpret. The qualitative data are basically presented as anecdotal quotes rather than in a way that is convincing evidence that this is the patterns that emerged – more description of difference (across sites, by age, by gender, diagnosis, etc) or highlighting outliers could strengthen the qualitative results. The tables are hard to read and interpret. For example, Figure 3 is not described in the text in a way that explains what these box plots mean. What is a 'good' KAP score? What is meaningfully missing when a KAP score is not good?

There is additional literature on aging, HIV, NCDs in Uganda/SSA/LMICs that are not included in the references that might be useful - while it isn't necessary to include all of them, it did seem like some key authors on Uganda were missing - Seeley, Wandera, etc. Some of these are:

Coovadia, H., Jewkes, R., Barron, P., Sanders, D. and McIntyre, D. 2009. The health and health system of South Africa: historical roots of current public health challenges. The Lancet.

Droti, B. 2014. Availability of health care for older persons in primary care facilities in Uganda. PhD thesis, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, University of London, London.

Kuteesa, M. O., Seeley, J., Cumming, R. G. and Negin, J. 2012. Older people living with HIV in Uganda: understanding their experience and needs. African Journal of AIDS Research.

Negin, J., Nyirenda, M., Seeley, J. and Mutevedzi, P. 2013. Inequality in health status among older adults in Africa: the surprising impact of anti-retroviral treatment. Journal of Cross-cultural Gerontology.

Nnko, S., Bukenya, D., Kavishe, B. B., Biraro, S., Peck, R., Kapiga, S., Grosskurth, H. and Seeley, J. 2015. Chronic diseases in North-West Tanzania and Southern Uganda. Public perceptions of terminologies, aetiologies, symptoms and preferred management. PLOS ONE.

Rabkin, M., Kruk, M. E. and El-Sadr, W. M. 2012. HIV, aging and continuity care: strengthening health systems to support services for noncommunicable diseases in low-income countries. AIDS.

Schatz E, Seeley J, Negin J & Mugisha J. 2018. They “don’t cure old age”: Delays to health care access among older adults in rural Uganda. Ageing & Society.

Wandera, S. O., Kwagala, B. and Ntozi, J. 2015. Determinants of access to healthcare by older persons in Uganda: a cross-sectional study. International Journal for Equity in Health.

Minor issues:

In Table 3 - says distance to clinic - assume this is kms, but doesn't specify

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

**********

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

PLOS Glob Public Health. doi: 10.1371/journal.pgph.0004701.r004

Decision Letter 1

Jepchirchir Kiplagat

PGPH-D-24-01877R1

Harnessing HIV clinics to deliver integrated hypertension care for People living with HIV in Uganda: A formative mixed methods study.

PLOS Global Public Health

Dear Dr. Ayebare,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS Global Public Health. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS Global Public Health’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

==============================

There are a few minor and one major revision to your manuscript - situating your findings within the literature in the field, that I hope you can consider in your revised copy. We look forward to your revised copy for journal's consideration

==============================

Please submit your revised manuscript by Mar 06 2025 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at globalpubhealth@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pgph/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Jepchirchir Kiplagat, MPH

Academic Editor

PLOS Global Public Health

Journal Requirements:

Additional Editor Comments (if provided):

While attempts have been made to revise this manuscript, the authors still need to refine the discussion section to situate the findings within the available literature in the field

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #1: (No Response)

Reviewer #2: (No Response)

**********

2. Does this manuscript meet PLOS Global Public Health’s publication criteria? Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions? The manuscript must describe methodologically and ethically rigorous research with conclusions that are appropriately drawn based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available (please refer to the Data Availability Statement at the start of the manuscript PDF file)?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception. The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS Global Public Health does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: Re-reviewing Uganda HIV/HTN manuscript for PLOS Global Public Health

Thank you for your thorough response to my comments. Excellent work clarifying the integration models, the settings for clinical integration, and the differences between blood pressure outcomes by geography.

General: consider changing every instance of “patient” to “participant” to confirm with patient-centered language (https://www.niaid.nih.gov/research/hiv-language-guide).

Introduction:

Line 82: “However, in order to improve clinical outcomes (such as screening and blood pressure control), existing barriers to HTN and HIV integration must be addressed.” Screening is not a clinical outcome; would remove.

Line 110: “Prescription and dispensing of antihypertensive medications at the same pharmacy as antiretroviral therapy.” Not a complete sentence; please revise.

Line 112-119: I’m still a bit unclear on how your current study relates to PULESA- it is one of six studies within the larger PULESA NHLBI grant?

Line 356/Table 6: “Only 44% of patients reported having their had their blood pressure checked within the 357 last seven days with 24% being checked between eight and thirty days ago.” You mentioned in your response that ‘guidelines recommend two measurements per day for a minimum of three and ideally 7 days, with an average of the measurements being used to diagnose hypertension’ and that you used ‘BP checks within seven days as one proxy indicator for optimal care’. I do not see these recommendations in the 2020 Uganda HIV guidelines, nor do I see anything there about home blood pressure monitoring. Can you please provide the guidance that recommends this? Can you please clarify in the text, if this is indeed correct, that your participants had home blood pressure cuffs and also please provide the frequency with which they were advised to check their home BPs? I am not convinced that “BP checks within seven days” should be considered a proxy indicator for optimal care in this setting - nor in any setting. Many HTN SOPs in subSaharan Africa call for repeat BPs on a monthly basis until HTN control is achieved.

Line 496: The sections on Relative Advantage and Costs seem to be making the same argument- consolidate?

Line 497: “Participants identified several advantages to the integration of HTN and HIV services, particularly in overcoming the barriers of fragmented care and high costs associated with antihypertensive medications.” I understand how service integration can decrease the cost of travel to reach the clinic when clients are making fewer visits, but how does integrated service delivery reduce the high costs of antiHTN medications? Nothing in the text supports this.

Discussion:

Line 648 - 674: I would make this section its own paragraph, and try to really tighten up the writing. There are a few themes here that are mentioned repeatedly and should be condensed (decreased transportation costs, inconsistent medication supply, increased convenience, improved adherence). I would remove the 3 mentions of ‘stigma’ here because it’s beyond this scope- I don’t think your research touched on integrated models reducing stigma.

Reviewer #2: I still find the qualitative aspects of this work underanalyzed. The authors made efforts to change this section - not just listing quotes - however, it still has too many sub-sections, not enough information about any variation across age/sex/geography/health status, and not enough information about how common particular answers were and what types of answers clustered together.

I also find the discussion to continue to be insufficient in engaging with extant literature on aging in Uganda, HIV & chronic disease, and aging in underresourced health care environments.

The paper has the potential to provide important information on the lives and experiences of older Ugandans living with HIV, so I hope that the authors continue to revise to make the paper as strong as it has the potential to be.

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: Yes: Deborah Goldstein

Reviewer #2: No

**********

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

Attachment

Submitted filename: Re-reviewing for PLOS Global Public Health.docx

pgph.0004701.s005.docx (13.4KB, docx)
PLOS Glob Public Health. doi: 10.1371/journal.pgph.0004701.r006

Decision Letter 2

Jepchirchir Kiplagat

Harnessing HIV clinics to deliver integrated hypertension care for People living with HIV in Uganda: A formative mixed methods study.

PGPH-D-24-01877R2

Dear Ms Ayebare,

We are pleased to inform you that your manuscript 'Harnessing HIV clinics to deliver integrated hypertension care for People living with HIV in Uganda: A formative mixed methods study.' has been provisionally accepted for publication in PLOS Global Public Health.

Before your manuscript can be formally accepted you will need to complete some formatting changes, which you will receive in a follow up email. A member of our team will be in touch with a set of requests.

Please note that your manuscript will not be scheduled for publication until you have made the required changes, so a swift response is appreciated.

IMPORTANT: The editorial review process is now complete. PLOS will only permit corrections to spelling, formatting or significant scientific errors from this point onwards. Requests for major changes, or any which affect the scientific understanding of your work, will cause delays to the publication date of your manuscript.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact globalpubhealth@plos.org.

Thank you again for supporting Open Access publishing; we are looking forward to publishing your work in PLOS Global Public Health.

Best regards,

Jepchirchir Kiplagat, Ph.D

Academic Editor

PLOS Global Public Health

***********************************************************

Reviewer Comments (if any, and for reference):

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #1: All comments have been addressed

Reviewer #2: All comments have been addressed

**********

2. Does this manuscript meet PLOS Global Public Health’s publication criteria? Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions? The manuscript must describe methodologically and ethically rigorous research with conclusions that are appropriately drawn based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available (please refer to the Data Availability Statement at the start of the manuscript PDF file)?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception. The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS Global Public Health does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: Thank you for carefully and thoughtfully addressing these concerns; the paper is much improved and ready for publication.

Reviewer #2: This paper is much improved and I appreciate the care the authors took in restructuring the results and integrating literature on aging in Uganda.

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

**********

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    S1 Text. KAP Survey Questionnaire.

    (DOCX)

    pgph.0004701.s001.docx (512.1KB, docx)
    S2 Text. Indepth Interview Guide.

    (DOCX)

    pgph.0004701.s002.docx (20.9KB, docx)
    S1 Checklist. COREQ Checklist.

    (DOCX)

    pgph.0004701.s003.docx (16KB, docx)
    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response_to_Reviewers.docx

    pgph.0004701.s006.docx (54.8KB, docx)
    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Re-reviewing for PLOS Global Public Health.docx

    pgph.0004701.s005.docx (13.4KB, docx)
    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response_to_Reviewers_06_March_2025.docx

    pgph.0004701.s007.docx (28.5KB, docx)

    Data Availability Statement

    Data reported in this manuscript are publicly available at Harvard Dataverse at the following url: https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/Z1MLGQ.


    Articles from PLOS Global Public Health are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES