A total of 439 valid questionnaires were collected, of which 252 were in the drop out group and 187 were in the treatment group.
Social demographic characteristics and general situations of drop out group
There were 189 males and 63 females with mean age of 39.46±11.88 years.There were 215 cases of Han nationality (85.3%). The marital status was mainly unmarried or divorced, with 174 cases (69.0%). 176(69.8%) of their educational level were junior high school or below. Their occupations were mainly farmers, housekeeping and unemployment accounting for 70.2% together. 84 cases (33.3%) had monthly income less than 500 yuan. 190 cases (75.4%) didn’t have minimum living allowances. In terms of transmission routes, 133 cases (52.8%) were heterosexual transmission, 43 cases (17.1%) were homosexual transmission, and 76 cases (30.1%) were intravenous drug use. 111 cases (44.0%) were living alone, 94 cases (37.3%) were living with their families.
Univariate Analysis of the General Situations
Univariate analysis was used to compare the treated group and drop out group according to age, gender, marital status, educational level, monthly income and other factors. The results showed that age, geographical division, educational level, occupation, monthly income, whether to receive the minimum living allowances, the route of infection, and living status had significant effects on the drop out of ART (P< 0.05).
Table 1. Comparison of general characteristics between treatment group and drop out group
Item
|
Treatment status during investigation
|
c2
|
P
|
Drop out group (n=252)
|
treatment group (n=187)
|
Gender
|
|
|
0.78
|
0.38
|
Male
|
189(56.3)
|
147(43.8)
|
|
|
Female
|
63(61.2)
|
40(38.8)
|
Age
|
|
|
11.37
|
0.04
|
≤24
|
24(61.5)
|
15(38.5)
|
|
|
25-34
|
58(47.5)
|
64(52.5)
|
35-44
|
97(66.4)
|
49(33.6)
|
45-54
|
47(58.0)
|
34(42.0)
|
55-64
|
19(54.3)
|
16(35.7)
|
≥65
|
7(43.8)
|
9(56.3)
|
Nationality
|
|
|
0.97
|
0.33
|
Han nationality
|
215(58.4)
|
153(41.6)
|
|
|
Ethnic minority
|
37(52.1)
|
34(47.9)
|
Region
|
|
|
39.16
|
0.00
|
Countryside
|
140(74.5)
|
48(25.5)
|
|
|
Town
|
112(44.6)
|
139(55.4)
|
Household register
|
|
|
1.85
|
0.60
|
Local county
|
119(58.6)
|
84(41.4)
|
|
|
Other county of the city
|
20(47.6)
|
22(52.4)
|
Other city of the province
|
39(59.1)
|
27(40.9)
|
Other province
|
74(57.8)
|
54(42.2)
|
Marital status
|
|
|
1.08
|
0.78
|
Single
|
88(54.3)
|
74(45.7)
|
|
|
Married
|
71(60.2)
|
47(39.8)
|
Divorced
|
86(58.5)
|
61(41.5)
|
Bereaved wife or husband
|
7(58.3)
|
5(41.7)
|
Educational level
|
|
|
31.79
|
0.00
|
Illiteracy
|
10(90.9)
|
1(9.1)
|
|
|
Primary school
|
55(67.9)
|
26(32.1)
|
Middle school
|
111(66.5)
|
56(33.5)
|
High school
|
34(45.3)
|
41(54.7)
|
College or above
|
42(40.0)
|
63(60.0)
|
Occupation
|
|
|
57.99
|
0.00
|
Farmer
|
112(78.9)
|
30(21.1)
|
|
|
Housework and unemployment
|
65(56.0)
|
51(44.0)
|
Service
|
27(39.7)
|
41(60.3)
|
Worker
|
11(37.9)
|
18(62.1)
|
Cadre staff
|
7(33.3)
|
14(66.7)
|
Retiree
|
1(8.3)
|
11(91.7)
|
Student
|
12(66.7)
|
6(33.3)
|
Migrant workers
|
9(52.9)
|
8(47.1)
|
Other
|
8(50.0)
|
8(50.0)
|
Monthly income
|
|
|
33.81
|
0.00
|
<500
|
84(75.0)
|
28(25.0)
|
|
|
500-1000
|
36(66.7)
|
18(33.3)
|
1000-2000
|
35(36.5)
|
61(63.5)
|
2000-3000
|
50(54.3)
|
42(45.7)
|
≥3000
|
47(55.3)
|
38(44.7)
|
Minimum living allowances
|
|
|
17.50
|
0.00
|
Yes
|
62(78.5)
|
17(21.5)
|
|
|
No
|
190(52.8)
|
170(47.2)
|
|
|
Route of infection
|
|
|
43.15
|
0.00
|
Injecting drug abuse
|
76(83.5)
|
15(16.5)
|
|
|
Male to male transmission
|
43(40.2)
|
64(59.8)
|
Heterosexual transmission
|
133(55.2)
|
108(44.8)
|
Living status
|
|
|
10.88
|
0.01
|
Live alone
|
111(58.4)
|
79(41.6)
|
|
|
Usually live with strangers
|
20(83.3)
|
4(16.7)
|
|
|
Live with classmates/colleagues/friends
|
27(65.9)
|
14(34.1)
|
|
|
Live with family
|
94(51.1)
|
90(48.9)
|
|
|
Recent CD4 counts
|
|
|
0.65
|
0.723
|
<350
|
126(59.2%)
|
87(40.8%)
|
|
|
350~
|
47(57.3%)
|
35(42.7%)
|
|
|
500~
|
79(54.9%)
|
65(45.1%)
|
|
|
Single factor analysis of antiretroviral therapy services
Through the single factor analysis of anti-virus treatment services provided by HIV/AIDS prevention and control institutions, it was found that referral methods provided by follow-up institutions and ART information provided by follow-up institutions were the influencing factors of dropping out of treatment (P < 0.05).
Table 2.A comparative analysis of ART for treatment group and drop out group
item
|
Treatment status during investigation
|
c2
|
P
|
drop out group (n=252)
|
treatment group (n=187)
|
First Result Notification institution
|
|
|
6.26
|
0.28
|
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)
|
179(61.5)
|
112(38.5)
|
|
|
Methadone maintenance sites
|
3(50.0)
|
3(50.0)
|
Antiviral treatment institution
|
3(50.0)
|
3(50.0)
|
|
|
Non-governmental Organizations
|
8(47.1)
|
9(52.9)
|
|
|
General Hospital
|
52(50.5)
|
51(49.5)
|
|
|
Other
|
7(43.8)
|
9(56.3)
|
|
|
Referral methods by follow-up institution
|
|
|
100.44
|
0.00
|
Carry the card to go by oneself
|
196(77.8)
|
56(22.2)
|
|
|
Doctors escort
|
56(29.9)
|
131(70.1)
|
|
|
ART information provided by follow-up institutions
|
|
|
14.33
|
0.00
|
Yes
|
222(54.8)
|
183(45.2)
|
|
|
No
|
30(88.2)
|
4(11.8)
|
|
|
Multivariate logistic regression analysis
According to the above univariate analysis results, according to the inclusion criteria of P < 0.05, age, geographical division, education level, occupation, monthly income, whether to receive subsistence allowances, routes of infection, living status, referral methods provided by follow-up institutions and whether to provide ART information were taken as independent variables, and whether HIV-infected patients were dropped out or treated as dependent variables (drop out=0, treatment=1), with multivariate Logistic regression analysis. The results showed that HIV-infected patients living in rural areas were the risk factors for the drop out compared with those living in cities and towns. HIV-infected patients who has monthly income below 500 Yuan compared with 500-1000 yuan and 2000-3000 Yuan compared with more than 3000 Yuan monthly, not receiving minimum living allowances compared with who has minimum living allowances were the protective factors for drop out. Follow-up institutions offered referral methods in which carrying cards on their own was risk factors of drop out.
Table 3. Logistic regression analysis about the influencing factors of dropout
item
|
category
|
β
|
S.E
|
Waldx2
|
P
|
OR(95%的CI)
|
Age
|
≤24
|
|
|
|
0.465
|
1.000
|
|
25-34
|
-0.979
|
1.001
|
0.957
|
0.328
|
0.376(0.053~2.673)
|
|
35-44
|
0.041
|
0.923
|
0.002
|
0.964
|
1.042(0.171~6.360)
|
|
45-54
|
0.029
|
0.890
|
0.001
|
0.974
|
1.030(0.180~5.897)
|
|
55-64
|
-0.269
|
0.918
|
0.086
|
0.769
|
0.764(0.126~4.623)
|
|
≥65
|
-0.400
|
0.971
|
0.170
|
0.681
|
0.670(0.100~4.499)
|
Region
|
Countryside
|
|
|
|
|
1.000
|
|
Town
|
0.808
|
0.328
|
6.051
|
0.014
|
0.446(0.234~0.849)
|
Education
|
Illiteracy
|
|
|
|
0.282
|
1.000
|
|
Primary school
|
-2.356
|
1.323
|
3.197
|
0.074
|
0.094(0.007~1.256)
|
|
Middle school
|
-0.852
|
0.587
|
2.105
|
0.147
|
0.427(0.135~1.348)
|
|
High school
|
-0.584
|
0.503
|
1.347
|
0.246
|
0.558(0.208~1.495)
|
|
College or above
|
-0.091
|
0.478
|
0.036
|
0.849
|
0.913(0.358~2.331)
|
Occupation
|
Farmer
|
|
|
|
0.248
|
1.000
|
|
Housework and unemployment
|
-2.752
|
1.339
|
4.227
|
0.040
|
0.064(0.005~0.879)
|
|
Service
|
-2.022
|
1.327
|
2.322
|
0.128
|
0.132(0.010~1.784)
|
|
Worker
|
-1.699
|
1.340
|
1.608
|
0.205
|
0.183(0.013~2.527)
|
|
Cadre staff
|
-1.345
|
1.379
|
0.951
|
0.330
|
0.261(0.017~3.889)
|
|
Retiree
|
-2.220
|
1.413
|
2.470
|
0.116
|
0.109(0.007~1.731)
|
|
Student
|
-1.862
|
1.452
|
1.645
|
0.200
|
0.155(0.009~2.674)
|
|
Migrant workers
|
-2.322
|
1.479
|
2.464
|
0.117
|
0.098(0.005~1.781)
|
|
Other
|
-2.005
|
1.433
|
1.960
|
0.162
|
0.135(0.008~2.231)
|
Monthly income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<500
|
|
|
|
0.016
|
1.000
|
|
500-1000
|
0.767
|
0.505
|
2.307
|
0.129
|
2.153(0.800~5.795)
|
|
1000-2000
|
0.522
|
0.548
|
0.908
|
0.341
|
1.686(0.576~4.939)
|
|
2000-3000
|
1.648
|
0.509
|
10.490
|
0.001
|
5.199(1.917~14.097)
|
|
≥3000
|
0.478
|
0.433
|
1.220
|
0.269
|
1.613(0.691~3.769)
|
Minimum living allowances
|
Yes
|
|
|
|
|
1.000
|
|
No
|
-1.276
|
0.404
|
9.988
|
0.002
|
0.279(0.127~0.616)
|
Route of infection
|
Injecting drug abuse
|
|
|
|
|
1.000
|
|
Male to male transmission
|
2.317
|
1.196
|
3.750
|
0.053
|
19.007(1.869~193.312)
|
|
Heterosexual transmission
|
1.390
|
1.235
|
1.266
|
0.261
|
4.014(0.357~45.198)
|
Living status
|
Live alone
|
|
|
|
0.053
|
1.000
|
|
Usually live with strangers
|
-0.665
|
0.304
|
4.796
|
0.029
|
0.514(0.283~0.932)
|
|
Live with classmates/colleagues/friends
|
-1.449
|
0.749
|
3.742
|
0.053
|
0.235(0.054~1.019)
|
|
Live with family
|
-0.820
|
0.499
|
2.702
|
0.100
|
0.440(0.166~1.171)
|
Referral methods by follow-up institution
|
Carry the card to go by oneself
|
|
|
|
|
1.000
|
|
Staff escort to go
|
1.910
|
0.279
|
46.931
|
0.000
|
0.148(0.086~0.256)
|
Reasons for drop out of antiretroviral therapy in HIV-infected patients
The top three reasons for the drop out of antiretroviral therapy in HIV-infected patients were: serious side effects; need to persist in taking medicine regularly; Medication interruption due to imprisonment.
Table 4. Reasons that HIV-infected persons in dropout of ART
Reason
|
The number of response
|
The rates of response(%)
|
Side effects are too serious to tolerate
|
87
|
34.5
|
to persist in taking medicine regularly is difficult
|
72
|
28.6
|
Medication interruption due to imprisonment
|
67
|
26.6
|
Treatment information is asynchronous due to the change of current address
|
60
|
23.8
|
No need to continue taking medicine for better health
|
39
|
15.5
|
Consider that the treatment is ineffective
|
25
|
9.9
|
Family members do not support treating
|
14
|
5.6
|