Scaling up an Evidence-based Intervention for Antiretroviral Therapy for PWID in Vietnam: an Implementation Trial (SNaPR01)

Scaling up HIV Prevention Trials Network (HPTN) 074: a Cluster Randomized Implementation Trial of an Evidence-based Intervention for Antiretroviral Therapy for PWID in Vietnam

The purpose of this study is to compare two implementation approaches [Standard Approach (SA) vs. Tailored Approach (TA)] for scaling-up the evidence-based systems navigation and psychosocial counseling integrated intervention (SNaP) in HIV test sites in Vietnam.

Study Overview

• Status: Completed
• Conditions: HIV Infections; Drug Use
• Intervention / Treatment: Other: Standard Approach (SA); Other: Tailored Approach (TA)

Detailed Description

This is a cluster randomized, controlled implementation trial to compare two implementation approaches (standard and tailored) for scaling-up the SNaP intervention in 42 HIV test sites in Vietnam. The SNaP intervention combines systems navigation and psychosocial counseling for people who inject drugs (PWID), and it is designed to facilitate PWID's engagement in HIV and substance use care.

The two implementation approaches being compared are:

• Standard Approach (SA); vs.
• Tailored Approach (TA)

SNaP is an evidence-based intervention (EBI) that combines systems navigation and psychosocial counseling to facilitate the engagement of HIV-infected people who inject drugs (PWID) into HIV and substance use care.

The 42 HIV test sites will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio to either the standard approach (SA) procedure or a tailored approach (TA), stratified by engagement of site leadership.

At the HIV test sites, the study will enroll:

• A cohort of 630 PWID who are newly diagnosed or previously diagnosed but not on ART will be enrolled for detailed assessments, including follow-up surveys and dried blood spot collection for viral loads. Additional PWID may be enrolled for medical records assessment without recontact. An additional 242 clinic staff will be enrolled to assess implementation outcomes.
• Note that the original design included ~6200 PWID attending the clinics who consented for medical record assessments only. Upon study initiation, the number of PWID with newly diagnosed HIV infection was substantially lower than predicted. The planned cohort sample was then reduced in size to 630 and all PWID meeting eligibility criteria were referred for enrollment in this cohort.
• HIV test site director boards and staff.

Study activities will span across 5 years, with approximately 27 months at each site and recruitment of PWID participants over 21 months. For the cohort PWID or PWID selected for qualitative interviews, maximum study participation time is 24-27 months. For PWID with medical record assessment only, participation is a one-time visit. For HIV test site director boards and staff, maximum time in the study is 24-27 months.

• Study Type: Interventional
• Enrollment (Actual): 1000
• Phase: Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

Study Locations

• Vietnam
  • Hanoi, Vietnam
    • Hanoi Medical University

Participation Criteria

Eligibility Criteria

• Ages Eligible for Study: 18 years and older (Adult, Older Adult)
• Accepts Healthy Volunteers: No

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

PWID participants:

1. HIV infection:

   • Newly diagnosed HIV infection, based on confirmatory test, and not currently on ART at the time of study enrollment; or
   • If previously diagnosed with HIV infection, then must not currently be on ART at the time of study enrollment (self-reported)
2. Age 18 years or older
3. Injection drug use within the past 6 months (self-reported at time of screening)
4. Willing to provide informed consent for the study

Test site director boards and staff:

1. All test site director boards and staff, including the navigators and counselors, at the selected HIV test sites
2. Willing to provide informed consent for the study

Exclusion Criteria:

PWID participants:

1. Residence outside of the catchment area of local antiretroviral therapy (ART) and medication-assisted treatment (MAT, e.g. methadone) clinics
2. Currently on ART at time of study enrollment (self-reported)
3. Planning to move out of the catchment area within the next 24 months.

Study Plan

How is the study designed?

Design Details

• Primary Purpose: Health Services Research
• Allocation: Randomized
• Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
• Masking: Single

Number of Arms

2

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm	Intervention / Treatment
Active Comparator: Standard Approach (SA); The Standard Approach is a one-size-fits-all multifaceted implementation strategy that was systematically developed using Intervention Mapping.	Other: Standard Approach (SA); The multifaceted implementation strategies for SA sites were identified through centralized Intervention Mapping. Before SNaP implementation starts, the specific set of one-size-fits-all implementation strategies was determined through a formal process with investigators, government stakeholders, and clinical representatives.
Experimental: Tailored Approach (TA); The Tailored Approach includes an implementation strategy that will be tailored to match site-specific barriers to implementation of SNaP at that site.	Other: Tailored Approach (TA); The Tailored Approach includes the multifaceted strategy that will be offered to the Standard Approach condition. It will also be tailored to match site-specific barriers to implementation of SNaP at that site. The strategy for TA sites involves a 2-day site-specific training, monthly coaching calls, and an external technical assistance hotline to help organizations to tailor implementation strategies to address their site-specific needs. At the 2-day TA training, the TA sites will be guided on developing site-specific implementation plans, in which they may use additional implementation strategies that they have identified themselves or selected from a list developed by the central team.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure	Measure Description	Time Frame
Fidelity to SNaP Intervention Procedures	Fidelity measures whether the SNaP intervention was delivered as intended. Fidelity score = (% Systems navigation sessions completed x Average navigation session quality score) + (% Counseling sessions completed x Average counseling session quality score) Session completion will be assessed by reviewing the navigator and counselor logs, while session quality will be assessed by central implementation team review and scoring of a random 10% of all forms (navigation) and audio-recordings (psychosocial counseling). Test site fidelity score range: 0-200 (Higher score indicates higher fidelity.)	Measured over 26 months after SNaP implementation in a clinic
Percent of PWID Who Initiated ART	Percent of PWID who initiated antiretroviral therapy (ART) among the PWID who initiated SNaP, measured through ART clinic records of consenting PWID and/or self-report. This measures ART uptake among PWID who initiated the SNaP intervention.	Medical record reviews conducted within 6 months after enrollment; self-report: 6-12 months after enrollment among those who initiated SNaP

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure	Measure Description	Time Frame
Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratio of SA Compared to TA for SNaP Implementation	The incremental cost per incremental ART uptake, comparing TA to SA, measured as: The difference in costs of implementing SNaP in TA compared to SA sites divided by the difference in ART uptake in TA compared to SA sites. Incremental cost-effectiveness of SNaP implementation will be assessed up to 24 months after SNaP implementation in a clinic.	Up to 24 months after SNaP implementation in a clinic.
Percent of PWID Who Were Contacted and Participated in SNaP	Penetration of SNaP at the test sites is assessed by this measure. Penetration of SNaP is defined as the proportion of newly diagnosed or previously diagnosed and not currently on ART PWID at test sites who are contacted by a navigator and/or counselor and participate in a SNaP session. Penetration of SNaP will be assessed at 12 and 24 months after implementation of SNaP in a clinic. Only the 24-month assessment is reported.	Up to 24 months after implementation of SNaP in a clinic
Mean Acceptability Score of SNaP by PWID (AIM)	Acceptability is the perception that the SNaP intervention is agreeable, palatable, or satisfactory to PWID. Acceptability among PWID participants will be assessed using the Acceptability of Intervention Measure (AIM), which consists of 4 items containing responses on a 5-point Likert scale. The AIM score will be the sum of the 4 item responses ranging from 4-20. Higher AIM scores indicate higher acceptability. Acceptability of SNaP by PWID will be assessed at 12, 18, and 24 months after SNaP implementation in a clinic. Only the first acceptability assessment collected for a participant is reported.	Up to 24 months after SNap implementation in a clinic
Mean Acceptability Score of SNaP by Test Site Staff (OADRI)	Acceptability is the perception that the SNaP intervention is agreeable, palatable, or satisfactory to test site staff. Acceptability among site staff will be assessed using the Ottawa Acceptability of Decision Rules Instrument (OADRI), a 12-item scale, staff and client acceptability of an innovation in a clinic setting. Eight of the 12 items were included in the assessment, excluding 4 irrelevant questions for the study setting. Scores range from 8-48. Higher OADRI scores indicate higher acceptability. Acceptability of SNaP by Test Site Staff will be assessed at 12 and 24 months after SNaP implementation in a clinic. Only the 24-month assessment is reported.	24 months after implementation of SNaP in a clinic
Percent of PWID Who Are Virally Suppressed	Percent of PWID who are virally suppressed among the PWID who initiated SNaP. Viral suppression is defined as <1000 copies/mL. (This outcome will be measured only in the PWID subsample cohort.) Percent of PWID virally suppressed will be assessed at 12, 18, and 24 months after SNaP implementation in a clinic. Only the first assessment collected for a participant is reported.	Up to 24 months after implementation of SNaP in a clinic
Percent of PWID on Medication-Assisted Treatment (MAT)	Percent of PWID alive and on MAT among the PWID who initiated SNaP, measured through medical records and/or self-report of consenting PWID. This measures MAT uptake among PWID who initiated SNaP. Percent of PWID on MAT will be assessed at 12, 18, and 24 months after SNaP implementation in a clinic. Only the first assessment collected for a participant is reported.	Up to 24 months after SNaP implementation in a clinic
Percent of PWID Alive and Remaining on ART	Percent of PWID alive and on ART among the PWID who initiated SNaP, measured through medical records and/or self-report of consenting PWID. Percent of PWID alive and remaining on ART will be assessed at 12, 18, and 24 months after SNaP implementation in a clinic. Only the first assessment collected for a participant is reported.	Up to 24 months after SNaP implementation in a clinic
Percent of Clinics Continuing to Offer SNaP After Completion of Study Activities	Sustainment of SNaP at the test sites is assessed by this measure. Sustainment of SNaP is defined as the % of clinics continuing to offer SNaP after completion of study activities, based on survey of clinic staff Sustainment of SNaP will be assessed up to 37 months after SNaP implementation in a clinic.	Up to 37 months after SNaP implementation in a clinic

Collaborators and Investigators

• Sponsor: University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
• Collaborators: National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA); Johns Hopkins University; Ohio State University; Hanoi Medical University; Vietnam Administration for HIV/AIDS Control
• Investigators: Principal Investigator: Vivian F Go, PhD, MPH, MA, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill; Principal Investigator: William C Miller, MD, PhD, MPH, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill

Publications and helpful links

General Publications

• Nguyen MXB, Chu AV, Powell BJ, Tran HV, Nguyen LH, Dao ATM, Pham MD, Vo SH, Bui NH, Dowdy DW, Latkin CA, Lancaster KE, Pence BW, Sripaipan T, Hoffman I, Miller WC, Go VF. Comparing a standard and tailored approach to scaling up an evidence-based intervention for antiretroviral therapy for people who inject drugs in Vietnam: study protocol for a cluster randomized hybrid type III trial. Implement Sci. 2020 Aug 8;15(1):64. doi: 10.1186/s13012-020-01020-z.

Study record dates

Study Major Dates

• Study Start (Actual): June 10, 2020
• Primary Completion (Actual): July 31, 2023
• Study Completion (Actual): May 31, 2024

Study Registration Dates

• First Submitted: May 14, 2019
• First Submitted That Met QC Criteria: May 14, 2019
• First Posted (Actual): May 16, 2019

Study Record Updates

• Last Update Posted (Actual): May 11, 2025
• Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria: April 23, 2025
• Last Verified: July 1, 2024

More Information

Terms related to this study

• Keywords: HIV/AIDS; Vietnam; People who inject drugs; Cluster randomized controlled implementation trial; Intervention mapping; Systems navigation; Psychosocial counseling
• Additional Relevant MeSH Terms: Blood-Borne Infections; Urogenital Diseases; Genital Diseases; Immune System Diseases; Infections; RNA Virus Infections; Virus Diseases; Communicable Diseases; Sexually Transmitted Diseases, Viral; Sexually Transmitted Diseases; Lentivirus Infections; Retroviridae Infections; Immunologic Deficiency Syndromes; HIV Infections
• Other Study ID Numbers: 18-2901; 1R01DA047876-01 (U.S. NIH Grant/Contract); IGHID 11844 (Other Identifier: UNC)

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

• Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?: YES
• IPD Plan Description: Individual participant data that underlie the results of an article, after de-identification.
• IPD Sharing Time Frame: Data will be available 6 months to 5 years after publication of the primary outcomes paper.

IPD Sharing Access Criteria

Other researchers who provide a methodologically sound proposal to study investigators may be provided access to de-identified data from the study.

The other researchers must execute a Data Use Sharing Agreement with the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (UNC) and obtain the applicable regulatory approvals from their institution before it is permissible for study investigators to share data with the other researchers.

• IPD Sharing Supporting Information Type: STUDY_PROTOCOL; ICF

Drug and device information, study documents

• Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product: No
• Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product: No