4.5 Article

In A Study Of A Population Cohort In South Africa, HIV Patients On Antiretrovirals Had Nearly Full Recovery Of Employment

期刊

HEALTH AFFAIRS
卷 31, 期 7, 页码 1459-1469

出版社

PROJECT HOPE
DOI: 10.1377/hlthaff.2012.0407

关键词

-

资金

  1. Harvard Global Health Institute
  2. National Institute of Child Health and Development, National Institutes of Health (NIH) [R01 HD058482-01]
  3. National Institute of Mental Health, NIH [1R01MH083539-01]
  4. Wellcome Trust
  5. US Agency for International Development
  6. President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Antiretroviral therapy for HIV may have important economic benefits for patients and their households. We quantified the impact of HIV treatment on employment status among HIV patients in rural South Africa who were enrolled in a public-sector HIV treatment program supported by the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief. We linked clinical data from more than 2,000 patients in the treatment program with ten years of longitudinal socioeconomic data from a complete community-based population cohort of more than 30,000 adults residing in the clinical catchment area. We estimated the employment effects of HIV treatment in fixed-effects regressions. Four years after the initiation of antiretroviral therapy, employment among HIV patients had recovered to about 90 percent of baseline rates observed in the same patients three to five years before they started treatment. Many patients initiated treatment early enough that they were able to avoid any loss of employment due to HIV. These results represent the first estimates of employment recovery among HIV patients in a general population, relative to the employment levels that these patients had prior to job-threatening HIV illness and the decision to seek care. There are large economic benefits to HIV treatment. For some patients, further gains could be obtained from initiating antiretroviral therapy earlier, prior to HIV-related job loss.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据