Systems Analysis and Improvement Approach to Improve Integration of HIV Prevention and Treatment Services (FP HIV SCALE)

April 27, 2026 updated by: McKenna Eastment, University of Washington
East and Southern Africa is home to 6.2% of the world's population but includes 54% of all people living with HIV (PLWH). In this region, three out of five PLWH are women, and there is a particularly high burden of HIV amongst adolescent girls and young women (AGYW). Over half of African women use family planning (FP) services. Integration of HIV prevention and treatment with FP services holds promise for supporting progress toward the UNAIDS 95-95-95 targets for testing, treatment, and prevention. Nonetheless, integration of even basic HIV prevention and treatment services into FP clinics remains low and how best to integrate these services is still unknown. In a previous trial, the Systems Analysis and Improvement Approach (SAIA), was an effective implementation strategy for improving HIV counseling and testing in a small selection of FP clinics in Mombasa County, Kenya when delivered by research staff. SAIA incorporates a cascade analysis tool, sequential process flow mapping, and cycles of micro-intervention development, implementation, and assessment to improve a care cascade. More data is needed to understand if SAIA is effective for also improving linkage to HIV care and screening and linkage to pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) in FP clinics when SAIA is delivered at scale by Kenyan public health workforce. The first objective of this study is to conduct a cluster-randomized trial evaluating the effectiveness of SAIA versus control (usual procedures with no specific intervention) for increasing HIV counseling, testing, linkage to HIV care, and screening and linkage to PrEP in new FP clients and new and returning AGYW clients. There will be a particular focus on the HIV prevention and treatment of AGYW in this study and any AGYW presenting for FP care will be prioritized. Quantitative and qualitative data will be analyzed using the RE-AIM framework to evaluate the program's Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance. To understand how SAIA could be integrated into national Ministry of Health policies and programs, activity-based costing will be conducted to estimate the budget and program impacts of SAIA, scaled to a County level, from a Ministry of Health perspective. It is hypothesized that compared to control, SAIA will be effective at increasing HIV counseling, HIV testing, linkage to HIV care, and screening and linkage to PrEP for new FP clients and all new and returning AGYW FP clients when delivered at scale by Kenyan public health staff. The implementation evaluation, costing, and budget impact analysis will establish a road map for national-level implementation, positioning Kenya as a global leader in integrating FP/HIV services.

Study Overview

Status

Status

Indicates the current recruitment status or the expanded access status.
Recruiting

Conditions

Conditions

The disease, disorder, syndrome, illness, or injury that is being studied. On ClinicalTrials.gov, conditions may also include other health-related issues, such as lifespan, quality of life, and health risks.

Intervention / Treatment

Intervention / Treatment

A process or action that is the focus of a clinical study. Interventions include drugs, medical devices, procedures, vaccines, and other products that are either investigational or already available. Interventions can also include noninvasive approaches, such as education or modifying diet and exercise.

Detailed Description

AIM 1: To conduct a cluster-randomized trial evaluating the effectiveness of SAIA versus control (usual procedures) for increasing HIV counseling, testing, linkage to care, and screening and linkage to PrEP in new FP clients and new and returning AGYW clients. Quantitative and qualitative data will be analyzed using the RE-AIM framework (21).

1a) Reach: Proportion of intervention arm health facility clients' reached with the intervention

1b) Effectiveness: Compare the effectiveness of SAIA vs. control for increasing rates of HIV counseling, testing, linkage to care, and screening and linkage to PrEP in new FP clients and new and returning AGYW clients

1c) Adoption: Proportion of clinics adopting SAIA; adoption determinants identified using the Implementation Research Logic Model (IRLM) (22) and Organizational Readiness for Implementing Change (ORIC) scale (23)

1d) Implementation: Proportion of FP clinics implementing SAIA with high fidelity at 12 months and at 24 months; barriers and facilitators of implementation at scale by County DOH personnel will be explored using constructs from the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) and the IRLM (24)

1e) Maintenance: Proportion of FP clinics maintaining SAIA at 12 months and 24 months after introduction AIM 2: To estimate the incremental cost and budget and program impacts of SAIA from a County DOH perspective. We will conduct activity-based costing and develop budget impact scenarios based on SAIA's adoption.

Study Type

Study Type

Describes the nature of a clinical study. Study types include interventional studies (also called clinical trials), observational studies (including patient registries), and expanded access.
Interventional

Enrollment (Estimated)

Enrollment

The number of participants in a clinical study. The "anticipated" enrollment is the target number of participants that the researchers need for the study.
40

Phase

Phase

The stage of a clinical trial studying a drug or biological product, based on definitions developed by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The phase is based on the study's objective, the number of participants, and other characteristics. There are five phases: Early Phase 1 (formerly listed as Phase 0), Phase 1, Phase 2, Phase 3, and Phase 4. Not Applicable is used to describe trials without FDA-defined phases, including trials of devices or behavioral interventions.
  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Contact

Study Contact

The name and contact information for the person who can answer enrollment questions for a clinical study. Each location where the study is being conducted may also have a specific contact, who may be better able to answer those questions.
  • Name: McKenna Eastment
  • Phone Number: 206-4165074
  • Email: mceast@uw.edu

Study Locations

  • Kenya
      • Mombasa, Kenya
        • Recruiting
        • FP Clinics in Mombasa County
        • Contact:
          • George Wanje

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Eligibility Criteria

The key requirements that people who want to participate in a clinical study must meet or the characteristics they must have. Eligibility criteria consist of both inclusion criteria (which are required for a person to participate in the study) and exclusion criteria (which prevent a person from participating). Types of eligibility criteria include whether a study accepts healthy volunteers, has age or age group requirements, or is limited by sex.

Ages Eligible for Study

  • Child
  • Adult
  • Older Adult

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Yes

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

FP clinics:

-All FP clinics that receive County-supplied FP products will be eligible to participate.

FP clinic managers and staff:

-Any FP clinic manager that is 18 years and older is eligible to be interviewed. -These clinic managers can be male or female.

Kenyan public health staff:

  • Any Kenyan public health staff that is 18 years and older is eligible to be interviewed.
  • These public health staff can be male or female.

Exclusion Criteria:

FP clinics:

  • Any clinics that are expected to close within the next year at the time of study initiation
  • 12 facilities that participated as SAIA intervention facilities in our small-scale trial where the intervention was led by research staff.

FP clinic managers and staff: No exclusion criteria Kenyan public health staff: No exclusion criteria

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Other
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: None (Open Label)

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm

Participant Group / Arm

A group or subgroup of participants in a clinical trial that receives a specific intervention/treatment, or no intervention, according to the trial's protocol.
Intervention / Treatment

Intervention / Treatment

A process or action that is the focus of a clinical study. Interventions include drugs, medical devices, procedures, vaccines, and other products that are either investigational or already available. Interventions can also include noninvasive approaches, such as education or modifying diet and exercise.
Experimental: Intervention clinics that implement the Systems Analysis and Improvement Approach
Mombasa County public health staff will facilitate SAIA
Other: Systems Analysis and Improvement Approach (SAIA)

What is SAIA? It is a 5-step cycle that is repeated every 4-6 weeks for continuous quality improvement, implemented by Kenyan public health workforce and FP clinic staff, and monitored by Mombasa DOH.

Step 1: Understanding the cascade from FP clinic enrollment to HIV testing to linkage to treatment and prevention services.

Step 2: Use process mapping to identify modifiable bottlenecks. Step 3: Define and implement workflow adaptations to eliminate modifiable bottlenecks.

Step 4: Monitor change in performance. Step 5: Repeat the analysis and improvement cycle (steps 1-4).
No Intervention: Usual procedures

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Primary Outcome Measures

In a clinical study's protocol, the planned outcome measure that is the most important for evaluating the effect of an intervention/treatment. Most clinical studies have one primary outcome measure, but some have more than one.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Effectiveness HIV counseling
Time Frame: Months 1-24
Proportion of new FP clients and all AGYW clients that are counseled for HIV out of the total new FP clients and AGYW in intervention vs control clinics
Months 1-24
Effectiveness HIV testing
Time Frame: Months 1-24
Proportion of new FP clients and all AGYW tested for HIV out of the total new FP clients and all AGYW who are eligible to be tested in intervention vs control clinics
Months 1-24
Effectiveness Linked to HIV care
Time Frame: Months 1-24
Proportion of HIV-seropositive new FP clients and all HIV-seropositive AGYW clients linked to comprehensive HIV care out of all HIV-seropositive new FP clients and all HIV-seropositive AGYW clients in intervention vs control clinics
Months 1-24
Effectiveness Screening for PrEP
Time Frame: Months 1-24
1. Proportion of new FP clients and all AGYW clients screened for PrEP out of all new FP clients and all AGYW clients who were counseled for HIV in intervention vs control clinics
Months 1-24
Effectiveness linkage to PrEP
Time Frame: 1-24 months
Proportion of new FP clients and all AGYW clients who are eligible for PrEP who are linked to PrEP out of all new FP clients and all AGYW who are eligible for PrEP in intervention vs control clinics
1-24 months

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Sponsor

Sponsor

The organization or person who initiates the study and who has authority and control over the study.
University of Washington

Collaborators

Collaborators

An organization other than the sponsor that provides support for a clinical study. This support may include activities related to funding, design, implementation, data analysis, or reporting.
Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD)

Investigators

Investigators

A researcher involved in a clinical study. Related terms include site principal investigator, site sub-investigator, study chair, study director, and study principal investigator.
  • Principal Investigator: McKenna Eastment, MD, MPH, University of Washington

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Actual)

Study Start

The actual date on which the first participant was enrolled in a clinical study. The "anticipated" study start date is the date that the researchers think will be the study start date.
March 14, 2024

Primary Completion (Estimated)

Primary Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention to collect final data for the primary outcome measure. Whether the clinical study ended according to the protocol or was terminated does not affect this date. For clinical studies with more than one primary outcome measure with different completion dates, this term refers to the date on which data collection is completed for all the primary outcome measures. The "anticipated" primary completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the primary completion date for the study.
October 1, 2026

Study Completion (Estimated)

Study Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention/treatment to collect final data for the primary outcome measures, secondary outcome measures, and adverse events (that is, the last participant's last visit). The "anticipated" study completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the study completion date.
October 1, 2027

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

First Submitted

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submitted a study record to ClinicalTrials.gov. There is typically a delay of a few days between the first submitted date and the record's availability on ClinicalTrials.gov (the first posted date).
May 24, 2022

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submits a study record that is consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. The sponsor or investigator may need to revise and submit a study record one or more times before NLM's QC review criteria are met. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
May 31, 2022

First Posted (Actual)

First Posted

The date on which the study record was first available on ClinicalTrials.gov after National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review has concluded. There is typically a delay of a few days between the date the study sponsor or investigator submitted the study record and the first posted date.
June 3, 2022

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

Last Update Posted

The most recent date on which changes to a study record were made available on ClinicalTrials.gov. There may be a delay between when the changes were submitted to ClinicalTrials.gov by the study's sponsor or investigator (the last update submitted date) and the last update posted date.
May 4, 2026

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator submitted changes to a study record that are consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
April 27, 2026

Last Verified

Last Verified

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator confirmed the information about a clinical study on ClinicalTrials.gov as accurate and current. If a study with a recruitment status of recruiting; not yet recruiting; or active, not recruiting has not been confirmed within the past 2 years, the study's recruitment status is shown as unknown.
April 1, 2026

More Information

Terms related to this study

Keywords

Additional Relevant MeSH Terms

Other Study ID Numbers

Other Study ID Numbers

Identifiers or ID numbers other than the NCT number that are assigned to a clinical study by the study's sponsor, funders, or others. These numbers may include unique identifiers from other trial registries and National Institutes of Health grant numbers.
  • STUDY00014745
  • GRANT13455302 (Other Grant/Funding Number: NIH)

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Cookie Settings

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. For more details carefully read our Privacy and Cookies Policy. ...>>>You can change your preferences or withdraw your consent at any time by deleting the cookies from your website or computer as described in the policy. Please accept it and choose your preferences by ticking the corresponding boxes in the "Manage Settings" section below. Please carefully read our Terms of Service before you proceed with using any part of this website.
«Manage Settings