Table 3.
Association between hair measure and self-reported measures of optimal adherence
| Adherence measures | Hair TFV concentration | Kappa statistics | Univariate modela | Multivariate modelb | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Optimal 123 (45.9%) |
Suboptimal 145 (54.1%) |
cOR (95% CI) | p | aOR (95% CI) | p | |||
| Frequency | ||||||||
| Optimal | 230 (85.8%) | 109 (88.6%) | 121 (83.4%) | 0.048 | 1.54 (0.76, 3.14) | 0.229 | 1.37 (0.66, 2.86) | 0.400 |
| Suboptimal | 38 (14.2%) | 14 (11.4%) | 24 (16.6%) | – | – | – | – | |
| Percent | ||||||||
| Optimal | 261 (97.4%) | 122 (98.4%) | 140 (96.6%) | 0.017 | 2.16 (0.41, 11.34) | 0.362 | 2.37 (0.44, 12.95) | 0.318 |
| Suboptimal | 7 (2.6%) | 2 (1.6%) | 5 (3.4%) | – | – | – | – | |
| VAS | ||||||||
| Optimal | 206 (76.9%) | 102 (82.9%) | 104 (71.7%) | 0.107* | 1.91 (1.06, 3.46) | 0.032 | 1.88 (1.03, 3.45) | 0.041 |
| Suboptimal | 62 (23.1%) | 21 (17.1%) | 41 (28.3%) | – | – | – | – | |
| CAS | ||||||||
| Optimal | 197 (73.5%) | 98 (79.7%) | 99 (68.3%) | 0.109* | 1.82 (1.04,3.19) | 0.036 | 1.80 (1.02, 3.18) | 0.043 |
| Suboptimal | 71 (26.5%) | 25 (20.3%) | 46 (31.7%) | – | – | – | – | |
* < 0.05. Data are in numbers and percentages [n (%)], TFV is tenofovir. VAS is visual analog scale. CAS is composite adherence score
aLogistic regression; cOR is crude odd ratio; aOR is adjusted odd ratio
bAdjusted for age, sex, ethnicity, marital status, work status, education experience, monthly household income, duration of HIV diagnosis, ART regimen and duration of TDF-based ART