https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4376-9656
Figures
Abstract
Background
In October 2019, a peer-based transition preparedness model was introduced as part of peer club activities to prepare young persons living with HIV (YLHIV) for adult care. This study compared the 12 and 24 months treatment outcomes of YLHIV who transitioned to adult care in primary, secondary and tertiary health facilities in Southern Nigeria, following the introduction of this model.
Materials and methods
This was a retrospective cohort study using data extracted from the medical records of YLHIV who transitioned to adult care at 25 years in 2018 and in 2021 across 155 healthcare facilities in southern Nigeria. Baseline data at transition, as well as 12 and 24 months post-transition data were extracted for comparison between those who were transitioned before (2018 cohort) and after (2021 cohort) the transition preparedness model was introduced. Logistics regression analysis was used to compare client continuity on treatment and undetectable viral load between the two groups at 12 and 24 months after transitioning to adult care.
Results
Most of the1,555 YLHIV who transitioned to adult care in 2018 (n = 343, 22.1%) and 2021 (n = 1,212, 77.9%) were females (91.0% in 2018 v.82.6% in 2021) and initiated ART at 20 years or older (92.7% v. 95.7%). A higher proportion of those in the 2021 cohort were continuously retained both at 12 months and 24 months post-transitioning compared to those in the 2018 cohort (12 months: 96.7% vs 80.2%, p < 0.001; 24 months: 92.7% vs 77.6% p < 0.001). Similarly, the proportion of YLHIV with undetectable viral load in the 2021 cohort was significantly higher than those in the 2018 cohort at both 12 months (96.1% vs 60.1%, p < 0.001) and 24 months (93.3% vs 80.6%, p < 0.001), respectively.
Citation: Nwanja E, Akpan U, Toyo O, Onwah O, Ekwueme C, Dixon-Umo O, et al. (2025) Treatment outcomes among young persons living with HIV who transitioned to adult care in southern Nigeria: A retrospective cohort study. PLoS One 20(5): e0321962. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0321962
Editor: Ibrahim Jahun, SKYDA Health Nigeria, NIGERIA
Received: August 28, 2024; Accepted: March 13, 2025; Published: May 12, 2025
This is an open access article, free of all copyright, and may be freely reproduced, distributed, transmitted, modified, built upon, or otherwise used by anyone for any lawful purpose. The work is made available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication.
Data Availability: All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files.
Funding: This study was supported by the United States Agency for International Development (grant number 72062022CA00007 to ECEWS).
Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Introduction
Life expectancy among people living with HIV has improved since the introduction of antiretroviral therapy (ART) [1,2]. AIDS-related deaths have generally halved since 2010 [3], and perinatally infected children are now growing from adolescence to adulthood [4–6]. However, AIDS-related deaths among young persons living with HIV (YLHIV) have only marginally reduced over the last decade [7]. Sub-Saharan Africa bears the brunt of the HIV epidemic, accounting for 89% of all adolescents living with HIV worldwide [8]. Nigeria has the largest population of adolescents living with HIV in West and Central Africa [8] with less than 90% currently receiving treatment [9].
YLHIV (adolescents aged 10–19 and youth aged 15–24) face a critical period when transitioning from adolescent to adult HIV care [10]. This transition often coincides with significant physiological, psychological, and social changes [10]. Additionally, this transition may involve changes in clinic settings, models of care, and healthcare providers. These factors can increase the risk of negative treatment outcomes, such as reduced adherence and treatment interruptions [11,12]. Davies et al who tracked the outcomes of four cohorts of adolescents who transitioned their care to another facility in the Western Cape Province of South Africa noticed a decline in the post-transition viral suppression rate [13]. Meloni et al also observed high post-transition treatment attrition among adolescents who transitioned from paediatric HIV clinics to adult clinics in Nigeria [14].
Several models of care have been developed to support YLHIV during this transition [15–18]. These include integrated family-centred approaches [15], teen clubs [16], transition camps [17], and youth-friendly transition clinics [18]. Some countries, including Nigeria, have introduced guidelines on interventions to support YLHIV during this transition phase [15,19]. In October 2019, a peer-based transition preparedness model was introduced as part of peer club activities in southern Nigeria. This model, funded by the United States President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) through the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), differed from other adolescent-focused programs. While existing programs primarily addressed treatment adherence and psychosocial support during adolescence, this model specifically prepared YLHIV for long-term adult care. It delivered peer-based services tailored to the age group, age-appropriate transition information, psychosocial support, and adherence support.
Evaluations of these interventions have yielded mixed results. Hansudewechakul et al. reported improved viral suppression among transitioning adolescents in Thailand using a group transition system [17]. Lolekha et al. found improvements in HIV and health‐related knowledge among perinatally infected youths (aged 14–22) using an 18-month “Happy Teen Programme” in Thailand [16]. Foster and colleagues utilised a multidisciplinary youth-friendly transition intervention in a tertiary setting in London [20]. However, Brain et al. found lower retention among adolescents who transitioned to the adult clinic compared to those who remained in the paediatric clinic in South Africa [21]. In Thailand, a 12- and 24-month evaluation of YLHIV who transitioned to adult care found suboptimal and comparable treatment outcomes among participants in a teen program and those who did not participate [22].
While existing studies offer valuable insights into treatment outcomes for YLHIV transitioning to adult care, they have focused mainly on perinatally infected adolescents and often involve specialised or tertiary healthcare facilities. Consequently, there is a paucity of evidence on the post-transition outcomes for YLHIV in other facility types, such as primary and secondary care facilities, particularly in resource-limited settings like Nigeria. This study addresses this gap by examining the treatment outcomes among YLHIV who transitioned to adult care using a peer-based transition preparedness model at different facility types in Nigeria.
The objective of this study was to assess the 12 and 24-month post-transition continuity on treatment and viral suppression rates among YLHIV who transitioned to adult HIV care at primary, secondary and tertiary facilities in southern Nigeria. The study considered the outcomes before and after implementing the peer-based transition preparedness model, including client demography and facility types.
Materials and methods
Study design and population
This was a retrospective before-and-after cohort study of YLHIV who transitioned to adult care. The study included two cohorts: a 2018 cohort (pre-intervention) who transitioned before the introduction of a transition preparedness model and a 2021 cohort (post-intervention) who transitioned after the model’s implementation. Both cohorts transitioned at 25 years of age at health facilities in Akwa Ibom and Cross River States, Nigeria. The study assessed the model’s effectiveness by comparing post-transition treatment outcomes between the two cohorts. The retrospective before-and-after cohort design was chosen because it allows for a direct comparison of outcomes to determine the effect of the intervention since this was part of program implementation. All PEPFAR/USAID-supported facilities in these two states were included, and all YLHIV within these facilities who met the pre-specified inclusion criteria were included.
Study setting
The study was conducted in Akwa Ibom and Cross River States. These states were selected for this study because they collectively account for 12% of Nigeria’s national HIV burden [23] and received funding from the PEPFAR through USAID to implement the intervention.
The study was conducted in all 155 PEPFAR-supported health facilities which include 104 primary, 49 secondary and 2 tertiary health facilities. The primary health facilities are widely distributed, located closer to communities, and are often the first point of contact with healthcare for most people [24]. They are often staffed by nurses and community health workers who provide general care [25]. Secondary health facilities serve as referral centres for primary health facilities and offer limited specialised services provided by doctors and nurses. Tertiary health facilities, which serve as the highest level of referrals, have highly experienced experts offering specialised care for disease conditions [25,26].
In PEPFAR-supported primary and secondary health facilities in Akwa Ibom and Cross River states, clinicians employed through USAID funding provide technical assistance to service providers on HIV management.
Pre-intervention Period
Before October 2019, YLHIV did not receive any specific intervention to prepare them for the transition to adult care. In primary and secondary healthcare facilities, YLHIV received care in the same clinics and from the same healthcare providers as adults. However, in tertiary health facilities, YLHIV received ART services in paediatric clinics until they transferred to adult clinics at 18 years. Case managers provided treatment support to all clients, including YLHIV, however, this was not tailored to any subpopulation.
Description of the Intervention
Beginning in October 2019, a peer-based transition preparedness model was implemented as part of newly introduced facility-based adolescent peer club activities. Table 1 summarises the essential features of this model. The model aimed to prepare YLHIV for adult care. All YLHIV in care whose HIV status had been fully disclosed to them were offered membership in the peer-based clubs, which were organised by age bands, 10–14 years, 15–19 years, and 20–24 years. YLHIV who joined the clubs graduated from one age band to the next as they grew older and exited the program at 25 years of age. The clubs met monthly, moderated by trained peer facilitators with support from the health facility’s clinical team. These meetings also served as service delivery points for medication pickups, psychosocial support, viral load [VL] sample collection, and other services.
The peer facilitators, who moderated the group meetings, were purposively selected from the treatment-experienced YLHIV at each facility. These were individuals who showed good self-care and were willing to disclose their HIV status to their peers and support them on their ART journey. They were then trained to provide adolescent-friendly services. During club meetings, they provided age-appropriate literacy materials and orientation on self-management; shared experience on ART, one-on-one support sessions to YLHIV (even outside peer club meetings), and psychosocial support. During the COVID-19 lockdown, virtual meetings replaced in-person club meetings. In addition to the clubs, all YLHIV were assigned to adolescent-focused case managers trained in adolescent-friendly care who provided continuous treatment support to YLHIV.
The peer-based transition preparedness model had four essential components. First was orienting YLHIV on the age of transition. This was done from the age of 15 years. YLHIV received orientation at club meetings about the transition to adult care at 25 years of age. The second component was a transition readiness assessment where healthcare workers routinely assessed YLHIV’s knowledge needs through informal discussions during clinic visits and club meetings and used this information to tailor support services. The third component was transition preparedness using a six-month transition curriculum. This curriculum covered topics on self-care, roles, responsibilities, expectations during and after the transition, treatment literacy, sexual and reproductive health, disclosure to partners, and peer support. Routine refreshers were provided at age-band groupings. The fourth was the actual transfer to adult care, where YLHIV were disengaged from club activities and were assigned/physically introduced to adult case managers when they turned 25 years old. They were also linked to Differentiated service delivery (DSD) for adults [27].
Data collection and variable definitions
Data were extracted from the electronic medical records of YLHIV who transitioned to adult care in 2018 and 2021. YLHIV were considered to have transitioned upon reaching 25 years of age.
Inclusion criteria.
- YLHIV who turned 25 in 2018 and 2021.
- YLHIV enrolled in peer-based clubs (2021 cohort only)
Exclusion criteria.
- YLHIV who transferred out of the facility after transition were excluded because their treatment outcomes could not be established during the follow-up period.
- YLHIV with less than one year of HIV treatment before the transition were excluded from the 2021 cohort due to their limited exposure to the intervention.
- YLHIV not enrolled in the peer-based clubs (2021 cohort only).
Variables.
Data were collected at baseline (25 years) and after 12 and 24 months post-transition. This included demographic data (age and sex), healthcare facility type (primary, secondary, and tertiary), and clinical data (year of ART initiation, antiretroviral [ARV] regimen at ART initiation and transition [categorised into Dolutegravir-based and non-Dolutegravir-based ART], viral load results with dates and ART treatment status).
The outcomes compared between the 2018 and 2021 cohorts include continuity on treatment (the proportion of YLHIV who were alive and receiving care), and undetectable viral load (the proportion of YLHIV with viral load <50 copies/ml) at 12 and 24 months post-transition. Continuity on treatment was disaggregated based on the frequency and duration of treatment interruption into “continuously retained” (no treatment interruptions throughout the period); “retained with treatment interruptions” (≥1 treatment interruption but active at the end of the period); and “not retained” (inactive at the end of the period). Viral load was categorised as sustained undetectable viral load (undetectable viral load [<50 copies/ml] at both 12 and 24 months), low-level viremia (≥1 viral load between 50 and 999 copies/ml during the period), and high viral load (any viral load ≥1000 copies/ml during the period).
Data analysis
Descriptive statistics (frequencies and percentages) were used to summarise the client characteristics, disaggregated by transition cohort. Client continuity on treatment and undetectable viral load were determined at 12 months and 24 months post-transitioning and compared by transition cohorts using chi-square statistics. The various disaggregates for continuity on treatment and viral load at 12 and 24 months were also compared across transition periods using chi-square statistics. Binary logistics regression analysis was performed to estimate the association between the treatment outcomes and the transition cohorts at 12 and 24 months. The logistic regression model was adjusted for age at transition, sex, and health facility type. These potential confounders were identified based on prior literature and clinical relevance. For the regression model, the 2018 cohort served as the reference category, and models were not analyzed if a variable had only one outcome category. All variables included in the logistic regression model had complete data, and no imputation methods were required. All analyses were performed using SPSS version 26, with the p-value set at 0.05. The reporting of this study conforms to the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement [28].
Ethical approval
Permission to analyse the secondary program data was obtained from the Health Research Ethics Committee (HREC) in Akwa Ibom State on December 22, 2022 (HREC No. AKHREC/25/11/22/120), with an extension granted on January 9, 2024 (HREC No. AKHREC/5/5/23/149). Additional approval was obtained from the Office of International Research Ethics (OIRE) on February 24, 2023 (Project #: 2026278–1). Data was accessed from the electronic medical records on June 25, 2024. Informed consent was waived because the study data was collected retrospectively, and only de-identified data were used for the analysis.
Results
The records of 1,555 YLHIV receiving first-line ART who transitioned to adult care in the two periods were reviewed (343 in the 2018 transition cohort and 1,212 in the 2021 transition cohort). The majority of the YLHIV in these transition cohorts were female (91.0% in the 2018 cohort, 82.6% in the 2021 cohort). Most persons initiated ART between ages 20 and 24 (92.7% in the 2018 cohort, 95.7% in the 2021 cohort). Regarding health facility type, 43.4% received services from primary healthcare facilities, 51.3% from secondary healthcare facilities, and 5.3% from tertiary healthcare facilities in the 2018 cohort, compared to 66.7%, 28.6%, and 4.7%, respectively, in the 2021 cohort. Table 2 below summarises the characteristics of the two transition cohorts.
ART regimen
All YLHIV who transitioned to adult care in 2018 initiated ART with non-Dolutegravir-based ART, with only 0.6% (n = 2) using Dolutegravir-based ART at the transition to adult care. In contrast, among the 2021 transition cohort, 82.7% (1,002) initiated ART on a Dolutegravir-based regimen, increasing to 99.8% (1,209) at the transition to adult care “Table 2”.
Continuity on treatment
As shown in Table 3, post-transition continuity on treatment at 12 months was higher for those in the 2021 transition cohort compared to those in the 2018 cohort (96.8% vs 93.6%, p = 0.006). However, post-transition continuity on treatment at 24 months was lower for those in the 2021 transition cohort compared to those in the 2018 transition cohort (95.0% vs 99.7%, p = 0.021).
Also, a higher proportion of those in the 2021 transition cohort were continuously retained both at 12 months and 24 months post-transitioning compared to those in the 2018 transition cohort (12 months: 96.7% vs 80.2%, p < 0.001; 24 months: 92.7% vs 77.6% p < 0.001).
As seen in Table 4, post-transition continuity on treatment at 12 months was higher among female YLHIV in the 2021 transition cohort compared to those in the 2018 transition cohort (97.4% vs 93.3%, OR: 2.71 95%CI [1.50–4.88]). Continuity on treatment at 12 months was also higher among those aged 20–24 years in the 2021 transition cohort compared to those in the 2018 transition cohort (97.0% vs 93.1%, OR: 2.39, 95%CI [1.381–4.134]). With regards to facility type, continuity on treatment at 12 months was higher among YLHIV receiving care in primary health facilities in the 2021 transition cohort compared to those in the 2018 cohort (98.8% vs 92.6%, OR: 6.36, 95% CI [2.651–15.262]).
At 24 months, post-transition continuity on treatment was lower for YLHIV aged 20–24 years in the 2021 transition cohort compared to those in the 2018 transition cohort (95.2% vs 99.7%, OR: 0.44, 95%CI [0.200–0.983]). By facility type, continuity on treatment at 24 months was lower among YLHIV receiving care in secondary health facilities in the 2018 transition cohort compared to those in the 2021 cohort (92.2% vs 97.7%, OR: 0.276, 95%CI [0.095–0.801]).
Viral load suppression
The proportion of YLHIV with undetectable viral load after transitioning to adult care was higher among those in the 2021 transition cohort compared to those in the 2018 cohort both at 12 months (96.1% vs 60.1%, (p < 0.001) and 24 months (93.3% vs 80.6%, p < 0.001) respectively. Similarly, 90.1% of YLHIV in the 2021 transition cohort had sustained undetectable viral load compared to 48.0% in the 2018 cohort (p < 0.001) “Table 5”.
The proportion of YLHIV with undetectable viral load was higher at 12 months in the 2021 transition cohort in all demographic categories except females (96.3% vs 60.9%, OR: 2.52, 95% CI [2.207–2.886]), and also at 24 months in all demographic categories except YLHIV receiving care in tertiary health facilities (85.1% vs 87.5%, OR 0.816, 95%CI [0.151–4.403]), compared to the 2018 year “Table 6”.
Discussion
This study found that continuity on treatment after the introduction of a peer-based transition preparedness model (2021 transition cohort) was higher at 12 months for YLHIV compared to before (2018 transition cohort) but lower at 24 months for the 2021 cohort. The proportion of YLHIV with undetectable viral load at 12 and 24 months post-transitioning was also significantly higher after the introduction of the model.
Continuity on treatment in adulthood is a recognized global challenge for YLHIV. In Nigeria, YLHIV face unique challenges such as stigma, lack of psychosocial support (especially among older adolescents who may be in boarding schools or residing in universities), financial stress, and disruptions in care due to the transition from paediatric to adult services, which can impact treatment adherence and outcomes [11,12,14,29]. The introduction of a peer-based intervention aimed to mitigate these issues by providing a supportive community and structured preparation for transition [14].
YLHIV who passed through the peer-based transition model had retention rates that reached the UNAIDS 95% target for sustained ART [30,31] at 12 months (96.8%) and 24 months (95.0%) post-transition. Our findings were similar to those from a cluster randomised control trial among youth (15–24 years) with HIV in Kenya [15], where retention was 97% at 12 months post-transition. An adolescent transition package was used to support transition readiness just like in our setting, which could explain the similarity in retention outcomes. In contrast, a longitudinal study among adolescents aged 10–19 years at the Jos University Teaching Hospital, Nigeria, found that 87.7% of adolescents who transitioned to adult care at 18 years were retained in care 12 months post-transitioning [14], while Davies and colleagues in South Africa reported post-transition retention of 90% among adolescents aged 10–14 years after one year [13]. Both studies only evaluated transition outcomes among YLHIV who transitioned at tertiary healthcare facilities and neither study reported an intervention to support the transition process, which may be the reason for the lower retention rates reported. Our study shares a retrospective cohort design with Davies et al. [13] and Meloni et al.[14] but uniquely includes transitions across primary, secondary, and tertiary facilities in Nigeria. In the South Africa study, the majority of the transitions occurred before 15 years of age and involved a transition between healthcare facilities, whereas in our study, the transitions to adult care were at 25 years of age, and the majority of YLHIV remained at the same healthcare facility.
The success of the intervention in our study could be attributed to the peer-led support, which enhanced psychosocial resilience and adherence education, which enabled a supportive environment for YLHIV during transition [32,33]. The structured peer clubs and case management may have provided the tailored support that is crucial for maintaining high treatment retention settings [32–34]. Peer facilitators provide relatable guidance and psychosocial support, which may have increased adherence to ART and clinic visits [34,35], as evidenced by the higher proportion of YLHIV continuously retained in the 2021 cohort. Additionally, the structured transition preparation, including readiness assessments and peer mentoring, helps equip YLHIV with the knowledge and confidence needed for a successful transition to adult care [36]. These findings suggest that implementing similar peer-based models in other resource-limited settings could improve transition outcomes by addressing the social, psychological, and clinical needs of YLHIV.
Although most interventions and studies on adolescent transition have focused on tertiary health facilities [14,37], YLHIV in primary and secondary health facilities also eventually transition to adult care and therefore require support through their transition process [32]. The transitions at these sites may or may not involve a change in clinic or healthcare provider, but they often involve a change in the method of service delivery. This is a shift towards more direct, less mediated service delivery models where YLHIV take on greater responsibility for their care [11,15,33]. YLHIV at primary healthcare facilities in our setting had better retention at 12 months after the intervention compared to before, although the retention at 24 months was comparable before and after the intervention in this health facility type. The improved treatment continuity rate in primary health facilities suggests that the addition of the transition preparedness model strengthened the continuity of care for YLHIV. Participation in peer-led interventions that include peer interactive meetings, one-on-one support and adolescent-tailored service delivery has also been associated with improved adherence and continuity on treatment in other settings [34,35,38–40].
YLHIV who initiated ART at 20 years and older had a lower retention rate in the pre-intervention (2018 transition) cohort compared to those in the 2021 transition cohort. This is consistent with findings from Niwa et al., who reported a low retention rate for YLHIV who initiated ART in adolescence [39]. Also, Meloni et al. reported that the likelihood of treatment interruption was lower among those with longer ART duration prior to the transition [14]. The lower treatment continuity rate among young persons with shorter ART experience prior to transition has been attributed to several factors including the higher risk of sexual and gender-based stigma among those diagnosed with HIV in adolescence [39].
Our study found a higher proportion of YLHIV retained on treatment at 24 months in the 2018 transition cohort compared to those in the 2021 cohort. This might be due to the impact of COVID-19 in 2020, which coincided with the second-year post-transition for the 2018 cohort. COVID-19 restrictions led to the scale-up of innovations like differentiated service delivery of ART, including home refills, to sustain access to ART [27,41]. Semo et al. demonstrated that DSD improves client treatment retention, especially among adults, and the choice of a DSD model was influenced by clients’ experience, cost, and convenience [42]. This effect of DSD may explain the higher treatment retention at 24 months among YLHIV in the 2018 cohort. In contrast, the proportion of YLHIV who were continuously retained was higher among those in the 2021 transition cohort compared to the 2018 cohort. The peer-based club into which the transition model was integrated emphasised adherence to clinic appointments and medications [36] and the higher tolerability of the Dolutegravir-based regimen compared to other regimens [43] may account for the higher continuous retention among YLHIV in the 2021 transition cohort.
A higher proportion of YLHIV in the 2021 transition cohort had undetectable viral load at 12 and 24 months post-transition than in other studies [40,44]. For example, Meloni et al. [14], Griffith et al. [45] and Rungmaitree et al. [22] reported 34.6%, 67% and 73.3% viral suppression at 12 months respectively [14,22,45] and Rungmaitree et al. reported 76.7% viral suppression at 24 months post transitioning which are all below the 96.1% and 93.3% undetectable viral load which we reported at 12 months and 24 months post transitioning, respectively. These studies [14,22,45] attributed poor medication adherence among transitioned YLHIV to the poor suppression rate and where the ARV regimen was reported, YLHIV were predominantly receiving non-Dolutegravir based (NNRTI- or NRTI) regimen pre- or/and post-transition compared to our setting where YLHIV in the 2021 transition cohort predominantly received Dolutegravir-based regimen post-transitioning. Nigeria implemented changes in ART regimen for adults and children in 2018 with a full scale-up in 2019, recommending Dolutegravir-based medications as the preferred first-line regimen to replace the previously recommended Efavirenz-based regimen in adults and older children [46]. This is a likely contributor to the higher undetectable viral load in the 2021 transition cohort at 12 and 24 months, as Dolutegravir has been linked with similar or better tolerability, viral suppression, and undetectable viral load than non-Dolutegravir containing ART [43,47–51].
The higher sustained undetectable viral load among YLHIV who transitioned in the 2021 cohort could be attributed to sustained retention in care, which plays a key role in viral suppression [52]. Also, undetectable viral load was emphasised as a goal of the peer-based club, “zero viral load” [36]. The intervention reinforced this messaging and may have also contributed to the significantly higher undetectable viral load among YLHIV transitioned after the intervention.
Limitations and strengths
Our study had some limitations. The use of secondary data limited our ability to consider other socioeconomic and clinical factors such as occupation and the presence of comorbidities, potentially skewing the outcomes by not capturing all influences on treatment adherence and retention. The reliance on existing records might have overlooked undocumented treatment interruptions or transfers. Secondly, some clients considered to have interrupted treatment may have reestablished care in other facilities without the service providers’ knowledge, which may have affected the accuracy of the retention rates. Our analysis was limited by the small population of YLHIV who transitioned to adult care in tertiary health facilities and who initiated ART before the age of 20 years, which may narrow the generalisability of the findings. Also, the ongoing data cleaning in the country limited our analysis to 24 months. The small number of studies that reported 24-month treatment outcomes and studies in non-specialised or tertiary health facilities limited our ability to compare with other settings. The study did not adjust for some confounders, such as client experience and DSD models, which could impact the outcomes measured. Despite these limitations, our study had several strengths. This study had a much larger population of transitioned YLHIV than similar studies. This study is also one of the few studies that have reported on the treatment outcomes of adolescents transitioning from primary and secondary healthcare facilities and, to the best of our knowledge, is one of the first studies to report 24-month treatment outcomes post-transitioning to adult care in Nigeria.
Conclusion
Continuity on treatment in adulthood is a recognised challenge for YLHIV. Our study found that a peer-led intervention to support YLHIV transitioning to adult care was associated with good continuity on treatment and undetectable viral load at 12 and 24 months post transition in relation to UNAIDS benchmarks.
This suggests that peer-based transition preparedness models can significantly enhance treatment outcomes for YLHIV in resource-limited settings. The evidence provided by this study will be useful to low and middle-income countries that provide ART services primarily through primary and secondary healthcare facilities. Policymakers should consider implementing these tailored, age-specific interventions to bridge the gap in service delivery during the critical transition phase. This approach could help meet the UNAIDS targets for HIV control in resource-limited settings, where most YLHIV receive treatment [3,30,31]. Further investigation is needed to assess longer-term outcomes (up to 60 months) and to consider socioeconomic factors and the perspectives of YLHIV and healthcare workers on the transition preparedness model.
Supporting information
S1 Table. Dataset for the characteristics of YLHIV transitioned to adult care in 2018 and 2021 cohorts and their 12 and 24-months treatment outcomes.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0321962.s001
(XLSX)
Acknowledgments
The authors acknowledge the healthcare workers and peer supporters for their selfless service and the Akwa Ibom and Cross River State governments for providing a conducive environment for project implementation.
References
- 1. Desta A, Biru TT, Kefale AT. Health related quality of life of people receiving highly active antiretroviral therapy in Southwest Ethiopia. PLoS One. 2020;15(8):e0237013. pmid:32818950
- 2. Lahai M, James PB, Wannang NN, Wurie HR, Conteh S, Bah AJ, et al. A cross-sectional study on caregivers’ perspective of the quality of life and adherence of paediatric HIV patients to highly active antiretroviral therapy. BMC Pediatr. 2020;20(1):286. pmid:32517722
- 3. Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS). Global HIV statistics- Fact Sheet [Internet]. 2023 [cited 2025 Jan 4]. Available from: https://www.aidsdatahub.org/sites/default/files/resource/unaids-factsheet-en.pdf
- 4. Cruz MLS, Cardoso CA. Perinatally infected adolescents living with human immunodeficiency virus (perinatally human immunodeficiency virus). World J Virol. 2015;4(3):277–84. pmid:26279988
- 5. Slogrove AL, Mahy M, Armstrong A, Davies MA. Living and dying to be counted: What we know about the epidemiology of the global adolescent HIV epidemic. J Int AIDS Soc. 2017; 20.
- 6. Maskew M, Bor J, MacLeod W, Carmona S, Sherman GG, Fox MP. Adolescent HIV treatment in South Africa’s national HIV programme: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet HIV. 2019;6(11):e760–8. pmid:31585836
- 7. The United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF). Global and regional trends [Internet]. 2024 [cited 2025 Jan 4];Available from: https://data.unicef.org/topic/hivaids/global-regional-trends/
- 8.
The United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF). Child was infected with HIV every two minutes in 2020, UNICEF says. UNICEF Nigeria. [Internet]. 2021 [cited 2024 May 30];Available from: UNICEF. (2020, Ma https://www.unicef.org/nigeria/press-releases/child-was-infected-hiv-every-two-minutes-2020-unicef
- 9. Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS). Nigeria | UNAIDS [Internet]. 2024 [cited 2025 Jan 12];Available from: https://www.unaids.org/en/regionscountries/countries/nigeria
- 10. Agambire R, Mchunu GG, Naidoo JR. Adolescent on the bridge: Transitioning adolescents living with HIV to an adult clinic, in Ghana, to go or not to go?. PLoS One. 2022;17(9):e0273999. pmid:36173996
- 11. Dahourou DL, Gautier-Lafaye C, Teasdale CA, Renner L, Yotebieng M, Desmonde S, et al. Transition from paediatric to adult care of adolescents living with HIV in sub-Saharan Africa: Challenges, youth-friendly models, and outcomes. J Int AIDS Soc. 2017; 20.
- 12. Tepper V, Zaner S, Ryscavage P. HIV healthcare transition outcomes among youth in North America and Europe: A review. J Int AIDS Soc. 2017; 20.
- 13. Davies MA, Tsondai P, Tiffin N, Eley B, Rabie H, Euvrard J, et al. Where do HIV-infected adolescents go after transfer? – Tracking transition/transfer of HIV-infected adolescents using linkage of cohort data to a health information system platform. J Int AIDS Soc. 2017; 20.
- 14. Meloni ST, Agaba P, Chang CA, Yiltok E, Oguche S, Ejeliogu E, et al. Longitudinal evaluation of adherence, retention, and transition patterns of adolescents living with HIV in Nigeria. PLoS One. 2020;15(7):e0236801. pmid:32735566
- 15. Njuguna I, Beima-Sofie K, Mburu C, Mugo C, Black DA, Neary J, et al. Managing the transition from paediatric to adult care for HIV, Kenya. Bull World Health Organ. 2019;97(12):837–45. pmid:31819292
- 16. Lolekha R, Boon-Yasidhi V, Na-Nakorn Y, Manaboriboon B, Vandepitte WP, Martin M, et al. The Happy Teen programme: A holistic outpatient clinic-based approach to prepare HIV-infected youth for the transition from paediatric to adult medical care services in Thailand. J Int AIDS Soc. 2017; 20.
- 17. Hansudewechakul R, Pongprapass S, Kongphonoi A, Denjanta S, Watanaporn S, Sohn AH. Transition of Thai HIV-infected adolescents to adult HIV care. J Int AIDS Soc. 2015; 18(1).
- 18. Nyabigambo A, Kanaabi Muliira J, Atuyambe L, Babikako H, Kambugu A, Ndoleriire C. Determinants of utilization of a no-cost HIV transition clinic: a cross-sectional study of young adults living with HIV/AIDS. Adolesc Health Med Ther. 2014; 89.
- 19. World Health Organization (WHO). Adolescent-Friendly Health Services For Adolescents Living With HIV: From Theory To Practice Technical Brief Peer Driven Adolescent HIV Models Of Care [Internet]. 2019. Available from: http://apps.who.int/bookorders.
- 20. Foster C, Ayers S, Mcdonald S, Frize G, Chhabra S, Pasvol TJ, et al. Clinical outcomes post transition to adult services in young adults with perinatally acquired HIV infection: mortality, retention in care and viral suppression. AIDS. 2020;34(2):261–6. pmid:31651427
- 21. Zanoni BC, Archary M, Sibaya T, Musinguzi N, Haberer JE. Transition from pediatric to adult care for adolescents living with HIV in South Africa: A natural experiment and survival analysis. PLoS One. 2020;15(10). https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33108396/
- 22. Rungmaitree S, Thamniamdee N, Sachdev S, Phongsamart W, Lapphra K, Wittawatmongkol O, et al. The outcomes of transition from pediatrics to adult care among adolescents and young adults with HIV at a tertiary care center in Bangkok. J Int Assoc Provid AIDS Care. 2022;21:23259582221143673. pmid:36474457
- 23. Onovo AA, Adeyemi A, Onime D, Kalnoky M, Kagniniwa B, Dessie M, et al. Estimation of HIV prevalence and burden in Nigeria: a Bayesian predictive modelling study. EClinicalMedicine. 2023;62:102098. Available from: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10393599/
- 24. Makinde OA, Sule A, Ayankogbe O, Boone D. Distribution of health facilities in Nigeria: Implications and options for Universal Health Coverage. Int J Health Plann Manage. 2018;33(4):e1179–92. pmid:30091473
- 25. Koce F, Randhawa G, Ochieng B. Understanding healthcare self-referral in Nigeria from the service users’ perspective: a qualitative study of Niger state. BMC Health Serv Res. 2019;19(1):209. pmid:30940134
- 26.
Federal Ministry of Health. Second National Strategic Health Development Plan (NSHDP II) 2018-2022. Ensuring healthy lives, promoting the health of all Nigerians. 2018.
- 27. Sanwo O, Persaud NE, Nwaokoro P, Idemudia A, Akpan U, Toyo O, et al. Differentiated service delivery models among PLHIV in Akwa Ibom and Cross River States, Nigeria during the COVID-19 pandemic: descriptive analysis of programmatic data. J Int AIDS Soc. 2021;24 Suppl 6(Suppl 6):e25820. pmid:34713591
- 28. von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, Pocock SJ, Gøtzsche PC, Vandenbroucke JP. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. J Clin Epidemiol. 2008;61(4):344–9.
- 29. Ekwunife OI, Ofomata CJ, Okafor CE, Anetoh MU, Kalu SO, Ele PU, et al. Cost-effectiveness and feasibility of conditional economic incentives and motivational interviewing to improve HIV health outcomes of adolescents living with HIV in Anambra State, Nigeria. BMC Health Serv Res. 2021;21(1):685. pmid:34247604
- 30. Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS. Understanding measures of progress towards the 95–95–95 HIV testing, treatment and viral suppression targets [Internet]. 2024 [cited 2025 Jan 4]. Available from: https://www.unaids.org/en/resources/documents/2024/progress-towards-95-95-95
- 31. Frescura L, Godfrey-Faussett P, Ali Feizzadeh A, El-Sadr W, Syarif O, Ghys PD, et al. Achieving the 95 95 95 targets for all: A pathway to ending AIDS. PLoS One. 2022; 17(8 August).
- 32. Garvie PA. Transitioning youth with HIV to adult HIV care: bridging the gap with adult care clinics for the life span. J Adolesc Health. 2017;61(4):407–8. pmid:28941483
- 33. Ayieko J, Thorp M. Transitioning youth living with HIV to adult HIV care. Lancet HIV. 2022;9(12):e810–1. pmid:36309039
- 34.
Nwanja E. NP AU, TO NH, SO, et al. Operation Triple Zero improves treatment outcomes among adolescents and youth living with HIV. 21st International Conference on AIDS and STIs in Africa (ICASA) Abstract reference number: PEE015 2021.
- 35. Antelman G, Jahanpour O, Machalo T, Audi C, van de Ven R, Rutaihwa M, et al. Adolescent support club attendance and self-efficacy associated with HIV treatment outcomes in Tanzania. PLOS Glob Public Health. 2022;2(10):e0000065. pmid:36962483
- 36. PEPFAR SOLUTIONS PLATFORM (BETA). Operation Triple Zero: Empowering Adolescents and Young People Living with HIV to Take Control of Their Health [Internet]. Available from: https://viralload.nascop.org
- 37. Hussen SA, Chahroudi A, Boylan A, Camacho-Gonzalez AF, Hackett S, Chakraborty R. Transition of youth living with HIV from pediatric to adult-oriented healthcare: a review of the literature. Future Virol. 2015;9(10):921–9. pmid:25983853
- 38. Ruria EC, Masaba R, Kose J, Woelk G, Mwangi E, Matu L, et al. Optimizing linkage to care and initiation and retention on treatment of adolescents with newly diagnosed HIV infection. AIDS. 2017; 31:S253–60.
- 39. Niwa M, Matos E, Rodriguez C, Wong M, Errea RA, Ramos A, et al. Retention and viral suppression among adolescents newly initiating antiretroviral therapy in adult HIV care in Lima, Peru: A Retrospective Cohort Study. J Adolesc Health. 2024;74(2):260–7. pmid:37804297
- 40. Trapence CP, Kanyenda C, Muyila F, Ndarama EP, Suffrin D, Connolly E, et al. Impact of a teen club model on HIV outcomes among adolescents in rural Neno district, Malawi: a retrospective cohort study. BMJ Open. 2023;13(8):e069870. pmid:37586863
- 41. Boyd AT, Jahun I, Dirlikov E, Greby S, Odafe S, Abdulkadir A, et al. Expanding access to HIV services during the COVID-19 pandemic—Nigeria, 2020. AIDS Res Ther. 2021;18(1).
- 42. Semo B-W, Ezeokafor N, Adeyemi S, Kpamor Z, Mugo C. Differentiated service delivery models for antiretroviral treatment refills in Northern Nigeria: Experiences of people living with HIV and health care providers-A qualitative study. PLoS One. 2023;18(7):e0287862. pmid:37428746
- 43. Hurbans N, Naidoo P. Efficacy, safety, and tolerability of dolutegravir-based ART regimen in Durban, South Africa: a cohort study. BMC Infect Dis. 2024;24(1):343. pmid:38515041
- 44. Mackenzie RK, Van Lettow M, Gondwe C, Nyirongo J, Singano V, Banda V, et al. Greater retention in care among adolescents on antiretroviral treatment accessing “Teen Club” an adolescent-centred differentiated care model compared with standard of care: a nested case-control study at a tertiary referral hospital in Malawi. 2017;Available from: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jia2.25028/full
- 45. Griffith D, Jin L, Childs J, Posada R, Jao J, Agwu A. Outcomes of a comprehensive retention strategy for youth with HIV after transfer to adult care in the United States. Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2019;38(7):722–6. pmid:30985513
- 46.
Sunny Oteikwu Ochigbo. Rapid Advice -Recommendations for 1st line ART in Nigeria. FMOH, HIV&AIDS Division. 2019;
- 47. Asare K, Lewis L, van der Molen J, Sookrajh Y, Khubone T, Moodley P, et al. Clinical outcomes after viremia among people receiving dolutegravir vs efavirenz-based first-line antiretroviral therapy in South Africa. Open Forum Infect Dis. 2023;10(12):ofad583. pmid:38045558
- 48. NAMSAL ANRS 12313 Study Group, Kouanfack C, Mpoudi-Etame M, Omgba Bassega P, Eymard-Duvernay S, Leroy S, et al. Dolutegravir-based or low-dose efavirenz-based regimen for the treatment of HIV-1. N Engl J Med. 2019;381(9):816–26. pmid:31339676
- 49. Silva GJ da, Mendicino CCP, Pádua CAM de, Tupinambás U. Suppression of HIV in the first 12 months of antiretroviral therapy: a comparative analysis of dolutegravir- and efavirenz-based regimens. Einstein (Sao Paulo). 2023;21:eAO0156. pmid:37255057
- 50. Cruciani M, Parisi SG. Dolutegravir based antiretroviral therapy compared to other combined antiretroviral regimens for the treatment of HIV-infected naive patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2019;14(9):e0222229. pmid:31504060
- 51. Patel AK, Patel KK, Pujari S, Patel JK, Kumar A. Virological outcome and frequency of low-level viremia in patients receiving generic dolutegravir-containing regimen at a large tertiary care clinic in Western India. Indian J Sex Transm Dis AIDS. 2021;42(1):31–7. pmid:34765935
- 52. Cherutich P, Kim AA, Kellogg TA, Sherr K, Waruru A, De Cock KM, et al. Detectable HIV viral load in Kenya: data from a Population-Based Survey. PLoS One. 2016; 11(5). Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27192052/