Table 2 Application of the RE-AIM framework to evaluate integration of PrEP delivery in into public health FP clinics
| Domain | Measurement level | Project specific outcome measures |
|---|---|---|
| Reach | Individual |
▪ Proportion of women screened for HIV risk and PrEP ▪ Number and proportion of at-risk persons initiated on PrEP |
| Clinic | ▪ Characteristics of implementing clinics | |
| Effectiveness | Individual |
▪ Incident HIV infection among PrEP users ▪ Detectable tenofovir levels in randomly collected DBS from PrEP users ▪ Client opportunity costs (e.g., clinic wait time) |
| Program | ▪ Cost and budget impact from the pragmatic perspective | |
| Adoption | Individual | ▪ PrEP continuation |
| Clinic |
▪ Number and % of clinics initially approached implementing PrEP in FP clinics ▪ Number and % of trained clinical FP staff who delivered PrEP at least once | |
| Implementation | Provider |
▪ Number and % of trained appropriately initiated on PrEP ▪ Consistency of implementation across staff (assessed by patient actors) ▪ Opportunity costs (e.g., Workload, impact on other services) |
| Clinic |
▪ Number of clinics regularly completing MOH PrEP M & E tools and report PrEP ▪ Number and proportion of clinics in which screening for HIV risk and PrEP regularly documented. ▪ Proportion of women testing is documented | |
| Maintenance | Individual | ▪ 3- and 6-month PrEP continuation rates |
| Clinic |
▪ Number of FP clinics implementing PrEP FP 6 months, 12 months after scale back of technical assistance ▪ Number of clinics with PrEP listed in the service charter |