Approval Probability 71%
TA Base Rate26%
Adjusted LOA41%
ML RiskLOW_RISK
| NCT ID | Title | Phase | Status | Enrollment | Velocity | Design | Start | Completion | Last Updated | Sites | Countries |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NCT04399551 | A Study Evaluating Implementation Strategies for Cabotegravir (CAB)+ Rilpivirine (RPV) Long-acting (LA) Injectables for Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV)-1 Treatment in European Countries | PHASE3 | COMPLETED | 437 | — | — | Sep 28, 2020 | Mar 13, 2023 | Apr 5, 2024 | 18 | Belgium, France +3 |
The AIM-Imp was designed to assess the acceptability of an implementation process (i.e., perception among implementation stakeholders that a given treatment, service, practice, or innovation is agreeable, palatable, or satisfactory). The measure consists of four items/statements (1. The implementation support thus far meets my approval 2. The implementation support thus far is appealing to me 3. I like the implementation support I have received 4. I welcome implementation support for the CAB + RPV injection treatment), each with a five-point rating scale (1 = completely disagree, 2 = disagree, 3 = neither agree nor disagree, 4 = agree, and 5 = completely agree). The mean score ranges from 1 to 5 with 1 indicating the least acceptability and 5 the most acceptability.
The IAM-Imp is designed to assess the appropriateness of an implementation process (i.e., the perceived fit, relevance, or compatibility of the innovation for a given practice setting, provider, or consumer, and the perceived fit of the innovation to address a particular issue or problem). The IAM-Imp is a four-item/statement measure (1. The implementation support thus far seems fitting 2. The implementation support seems suitable for using the CAB + RPV injection treatment 3. The implementation support seems applicable for the CAB + RPV injection treatment 4. The implementation support seems like a good match) with a five-point rating scale (1 = completely disagree, 2 = disagree, 3 = neither agree nor disagree, 4 = agree, and 5 = completely agree). The mean score ranges from 1 to 5 with 1 indicating the least appropriateness and 5 the most appropriateness.
The FIM-Imp was a four-item/statement measure (1. The implementation support seems implementable in our clinic/practice 2. The implementation support seems possible in our clinic/practice 3. The implementation support seems doable in our clinic/practice 4. The implementation support seems easy to use in our clinic/practice) and was measured on a five-point rating scale (1 = completely disagree, 2 = disagree, 3 = neither agree nor disagree, 4 = agree, and 5 = completely agree). The mean score ranges from 1 to 5 with 1 indicating the least feasibility and 5 the most feasibility.
A semi-structured interview guide was designed to support the discussion surrounding experience with the implementation of CAB+RPV LA injection treatment. The interview guide topics were informed by the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, Sustainment (EPIS) framework and Proctor Outcomes to facilitate discussions on the acceptability from the SSPs' perspective. The results of themes that are integral to successful implementation are presented based on implementation strategies.
A semi-structured interview guide was designed to support the discussion surrounding experience with the implementation of CAB+RPV LA injection treatment. The interview guide topics were informed by the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, Sustainment (EPIS) framework and Proctor Outcomes to facilitate discussions on the appropriateness from the SSPs' perspective. The results of themes that are integral to successful implementation are presented based on implementation strategies.
A semi-structured interview guide was designed to support the discussion surrounding experience with the implementation of CAB+RPV LA injection treatment. The interview guide topics were informed by the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, Sustainment (EPIS) framework and Proctor Outcomes to facilitate discussions on the feasibility from the SSPs' perspective. The results of themes that are integral to successful implementation are presented based on implementation strategies.
| Arm | Type | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Participants with HIV infection | EXPERIMENTAL | HIV-infected participants will receive CAB LA + RPV LA regimen for a month of oral lead in (OLI) at Day 1 followed by CAB LA + RPV LA injections at Months 1 and 2 and every 2 months (Q2M) thereafter. |
| Staff study participants (SSP) | OTHER | Staff study participants will be randomized to receive standard implementation support (Arm-S; through visit(s) with the medication lead in their country, education on the medication, and patient and staff education/support materials) or through enhanced implementation support (Arm-E; through the addition of continuous quality improvement during the study). |
| Name | Type | Description |
|---|---|---|
| CAB OLI | DRUG | CAB will be available as 30 milligrams (mg) tablet. It will be administered as one tablet once daily with food from Day 1 to Month 1. |
| CAB LA | DRUG | CAB LA 600 mg will be administered as intramuscular (IM) injection. |
| RPV OLI | DRUG | RPV will be available as 25 mg tablet. It will be administered as one tablet once daily with food from Day 1 to Month 1. |
| RPV LA | DRUG | RPV LA 900 mg will be administered as IM injection. |
| Continuous Quality Improvement (CQI) calls | OTHER | CQI will be attended by the enhanced arm (Arm-E). The CQI calls will be conducted to identify problems/challenges, generate plans to address the challenges, and identify how to measure the change that results from the plan. |
Inclusion Criteria: * Participants aged 18 years or older at the time of signing the informed consent. * HIV-1 infected and must be suppressed on a guideline recommended active Highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) regimen for at least 6 months prior to screening. Any prior switch, defined a...