Introduction: Mobility is associated with worse outcomes across the HIV treatment cascade, especially among men. However, little is known about the mechanisms that link mobility and poor HIV outcomes and what types of mobility most increase the risk of treatment interruption among men in southern Africa.Methods: From August 2021 to January 2022, we conducted a mixed‐methods study with men living with HIV (MLHIV) but not currently receiving antiretroviral therapy (ART) in Malawi. Data collection was embedded within two larger trials (ENGAGE and IDEaL trials). We analysed baseline survey data of 223 men enrolled in the trials who reported being mobile (defined as spending ≥14 nights away from home in the past 12 months) using descriptive statistics and negative binomial regressions. We then recruited 32 men for in‐depth interviews regarding their travel experiences and ART utilization. We analysed qualitative data using constant comparative methods.Results: Survey data showed that 34% of men with treatment interruptions were mobile, with a median of 60 nights away from home in the past 12 months; 69% of trips were for income generation. More nights away from home in the past 12 months and having fewer household assets were associated with longer periods out of care. In interviews, men reported that travel was often unplanned, and men were highly vulnerable to exploitive employer demands, which led to missed appointments and ART interruption. Men made major efforts to stay in care but were often unable to access care on short notice, were denied ART refills at non‐home facilities and/or were treated poorly by providers, creating substantial barriers to remaining in and returning to care. Men desired additional multi‐month dispensing (MMD), the ability to refill treatment at any facility in Malawi, and streamlined pre‐travel refills at home facilities.Conclusions: Men prioritize ART and struggle with the trade‐offs between their own health and providing for their families. Mobility is an essential livelihood strategy for MLHIV in Malawi, but it creates conflict with ART retention, largely due to inflexible health systems. Targeted counselling and peer support, access to ART services anywhere in the country, and MMD may improve outcomes for mobile men.

Introduction: Mobility is common and an essential livelihood strategy in sub‐Saharan Africa (SSA). Mobile people suffer worse outcomes at every stage of the HIV care cascade compared to non‐mobile populations. Definitions of mobility vary widely, and research on the role of temporary mobility (as opposed to permanent migration) in HIV treatment outcomes is often lacking. In this article, we review the current landscape of mobility and HIV care research to identify what is already known, gaps in the literature, and recommendations for future research.Discussion: Mobility in SSA is closely linked to income generation, though caregiving, climate change and violence also contribute to the need to move. Mobility is likely to increase in the coming decades, both due to permanent migration and increased temporary mobility, which is likely much more common. We outline three central questions regarding mobility and HIV treatment outcomes in SSA. First, it is unclear what aspects of mobility matter most for HIV care outcomes and if high‐risk mobility can be identified or predicted, which is necessary to facilitate targeted interventions for mobile populations. Second, it is unclear what groups are most vulnerable to mobility‐associated treatment interruption and other adverse outcomes. And third, it is unclear what interventions can improve HIV treatment outcomes for mobile populations.Conclusions: Mobility is essential for people living with HIV in SSA. HIV treatment programmes and broader health systems must understand and adapt to human mobility, both to promote the rights and welfare of mobile people and to end the HIV pandemic.

Introduction: Men have higher rates of morbidity and mortality across nearly all top ten causes of mortality worldwide. Much of this disparity is attributed to men’s lower utilization of routine health services; however, little is known about men’s general healthcare utilization in sub-Saharan Africa.Methods: We analyze the responses of 1,116 men in a community-representative survey of men drawn from a multi-staged sample of residents of 36 villages in Malawi to identify factors associated with men’s facility attendance in the last 12 months, either for men’s own health (client visit) or to support the health care of someone else (caregiver visit). We conducted single-variable tests of association and multivariable logistic regression with random effects to account for clustering at the village level.Results: Median age of participants was 34, 74% were married, and 82% attended a health facility in the last year (63% as client, 47% as caregiver). Neither gender norm beliefs nor socioeconomic factors were independently associated with attending a client visit. Only problems with quality of health services (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.294, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.10—0.823) and good health (aOR 0.668, 95% CI 0.462–0.967) were independently associated with client visit attendance. Stronger beliefs in gender norms were associated with caregiver visits (beliefs about acceptability of violence [aOR = 0.661, 95% CI 0.488–0.896], male sexual dominance [aOR = 0.703, 95% CI 0.505–0.978], and traditional women’s roles [aOR = 0.718, 95% CI 0.533–0.966]). Older age (aOR 0.542, 95% CI 0.401–0.731) and being married (aOR 2.380, 95% CI 1.196–4.737) were also independently associated with caregiver visits.Conclusion: Quality of services offered at local health facilities and men’s health status were the only variables associated with client facility visits among men, while harmful gender norms, not being married, and being younger were negatively associated with caregiver visits.

Subspecialty expertise is often lacking in clinical environments in low-resource settings. As a result, medically complicated patients can receive suboptimal care, local clinicians can feel inadequately supported, and global health engagements can be difficult for medical trainees accustomed to more expert supervision at their home institutions. We created WhatsApp Messenger discussion groups to connect subspecialists at the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) David Geffen School of Medicine with clinicians and rotating global health residents at Partners in Hope (PIH) Medical Center in Lilongwe, Malawi. Case submitters and subspecialist respondents were surveyed about their experience in the discussion groups. Over a three-year period, 95 cases were discussed in ten subspecialty groups, with dermatology and radiology/pulmonology receiving the most submissions. Participants were surveyed and reported excellent educational outcomes; large majorities of both case submitters (89%) and experts (71%) agreed or strongly agreed that the case discussions improved their medical education. The surveys also suggested positive impact on medical management decisions and patient outcomes. The major challenge to our intervention was low utilization of this resource by Malawian clinicians in comparison to medical residents. We hope to further address the barriers to participation and adapt the intervention to better support our Malawian colleagues. Because the discussion groups are free to create and require very little maintenance, this intervention can be easily replicated at other institutions looking to augment their global health educational engagements and support their clinical partners abroad.

Introduction: Human mobility is a critical aspect of existence and survival, but may compromise care engagement among people living with HIV (PLHIV). We examined the association between various forms of human mobility with retention in HIV care and antiretroviral treatment (ART) interruptions. Methods: In a cohort of adult PLHIV in Kenya and Uganda, we collected surveys in 2016 about past 6-month travel and lifetime migration histories, including reasons and locations, and engagement in HIV care defined as (1) discontinuation of care, and (2) history of a treatment interruption among those who remained in care. We estimated associations between mobility and these care engagement outcomes via logistic regression, adjusted for sex, prior mobility, age, region, marital status, household wealth, and education. Results: Among 1081 participants, 56 (5%) reported having discontinued care; among those in care, 104 (10%) reported treatment interruption. Past-year migration was associated with a higher risk of discontinuation of care (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.98, 95% CI 1.08–3.63). In sex-stratified models, the association was somewhat attenuated in women, but remained robust among men. Past-year migration was associated with reduced odds of having a treatment interruption among men (aOR 0.51, 95% CI 0.34–0.77) but not among women (aOR 2.67, 95% CI 0.78, 9.16). Travel in the past 6 months was not associated with discontinuation of care or treatment interruptions. Conclusions: We observed both negative and protective effects of recent migration on care engagement and ART use that were most pronounced among men in this cohort. Migration can break ties to ongoing care, but for men, who have more agency in the decision to migrate, may foster new care and treatment strategies. Strategies that enable health facilities to support individuals throughout the process of transferring care could alleviate the risk of care disengagement.

The global HIV landscape has changed over the past few decades, with great milestones achieved in both HIV treatment and prevention