Table 3.
Intention-to-treat Analyses: Effect of LINC intervention compared to usual care on HIV outcomes
| Usual Care (n=175) | LINC Intervention (n=174) | AORa (95% CI) | p-value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Primary outcomes | ||||
| Linkage to HIV care (%) | 31% | 51% | 2.34 (1.49, 3.67) | < 0.001 |
| CD4 count at 12 months, mean (SD) | 354 (341) | 343 (257) | 1.14b (0.91, 1.42) | 0.25 |
| Secondary outcomes | ||||
| Retention in HIV care (%) | 22% | 27% | 1.30 (0.78, 2.17) | 0.31 |
| Appropriate HIV care (%)c | 23% | 33% | 1.69 (1.02, 2.82) | 0.04 |
| Self-reported hospitalizations at 12 months (%) | 9% | 15% | 1.77 (0.84, 3.74) | 0.14 |
a
Comparing LINC intervention vs. Usual care, adjusting for randomization stratification factors, i.e. outpatient HIV visit past year and ever hospitalized for HIV
b
Represents ratio of means after back transformation from log scale
c
Composite of prescribed ART or having 2nd CD4 count if initial CD4 >350.
Usual care: 10% prescribed ART, 9% had 2nd CD4 count
LINC intervention: 17% prescribed ART, 12% had 2nd CD4 count
In both arms, 4% had no initial CD4 count but were imputed as appropriate care based on other participant characteristics.