Study design and setting
A cross-sectional study was carried out at the HIV clinic of Infectious Disease Institute (IDI),Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda among adult PLHIV on atazanavir containing ART regimen from 8th April to 5th May 2019. IDI is a Ugandan not-for-profit organization established under Makerere University in 2002 located in Kampala. The HIV clinic is located within Mulago National Referral Hospital. As of 2021, the adult infectious disease clinic at IDI provides ART services to over 7000 PLWHIV among whom about 900 have ATV based ART regimen.
Sample size,
A sample size of 270 participants was calculated using Cochran’s formula [20]. Using an estimated population of 871 PLWHIV on ATV/r regimen at IDI, 50% estimated prevalence of clinical jaundice since no study has been conducted in a similar setting, 5% acceptable margin of error at 95% confidence interval, a sample size of 270 was calculated.
Selection criteria and sampling
The following criteria was used to enroll eligible participants: (1) Laboratory confirmed HIV positive patients, (2) aged 18 years and above, (3) on ATV/r based regimen for at least 3 months. Patients too ill to participate in the study, were to be excluded. Consecutive sampling was used enroll the participants until the targeted sample size was reached.
Data collection and data variables
We collected data using a pre-tested interviewer-based questionnaire with semi-structured questions. The study’s dependent variable was adherence to ART; assessed using the 8-item Morisky Medication Adherence Scale (8-MMAS)[21]. The 8-MMAS has 8 questions; numbers were assigned to each response and then summed up for everyone. Results were dichotomized; <3 and >3 were interpreted as good adherence to ART and, poor adherence to ART respectively. Furthermore, to ascertain ART adherence, pill count was done for those who came with their pill containers.
The independent variables were clinical jaundice (both prior or current while on ATV/r based regimen), duration on ART, comorbidities (hypertension, diabetes and tuberculosis), social support, pill burden, disclosure, stigma score and discrimination and, socio-demographic characteristics: age, tribe, gender, religion, education level, employment, economic status, marital status. Clinical jaundice was based on the participants’ self-report and the interviewers’ observance of the clinical signs: yellow mucous membranes and yellow tinge to the skin on the day of the interview. Social support was assessed using the Oslo support scale where numbers were assigned to each response. Total scores were obtained for each individual and results were categorized into 3; 3-8, 9-11 and 12-14: representing poor, moderate, and strong social support respectively. Stigma score and discrimination was assessed using the 8-item stigma score for chronic illnesses (8-SSCI) [22]. Scores were assigned to each response: > 5 and <5 indicated that the patient was stigmatized and not stigmatized respectively.
Data analysis
Data was entered and coded in EpiData software, it was then exported and analyzed in the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) database version 25. Continuous data was summarized into means and standard deviation for the general descriptions. Categorical data was summarized into frequency distribution tables, proportions, and percentages. The prevalence of clinical jaundice was calculated as a percentage with 95% confidence interval. It was categorized into point or period prevalence denotating; a patient had clinical jaundice at the time of the study or has ever had clinical Jaundice due to ATV/r respectively. We carried out bivariate analysis for each independent variable and adherence. After this level of analysis, statistically significant (p<0.2) variables were clinical jaundice, sex, alcohol use, patient’s ability to speak to the doctor about jaundice, and stigma and discrimination. Thereafter, these variables were considered for multivariable analysis using multiple logistic regression [23]. The extraneous variables were then eliminated (p >0.05) using stepwise elimination methods. A p<0.05 was considered statistically significant at all levels of hypothesis testing.
Ethics statement
Ethics review and approval was sought from the Makerere University School of Health Sciences Research and Ethics Committee (MakSHS-REC), reference number 2018-086. Administrative permission was obtained from the IDI Scientific Review Committee (SRC). Written informed was obtained from every study participant before the interview.