Predictive of overall patient satisfaction may differ from those that may

Predictive of overall patient satisfaction may differ from those that may affect clinical outcomes. For example, provider training in problem solving focused adherence counseling techniques, as proposed in Wilson et al. [43], may have more influence on adherence than providers’ interpersonal and general communication skills. Future research directions need to include prospective quantitative studies to: 1) better understand which component or components of the care experience are most predictive of overall patient satisfaction, medication adherence and retention in 11967625 HIV care, 2) quantify how the strength of association changes over time as care progresses and what factors significantly influence those trends, and 3) establish causal direction. This study has several methodological strengths. Our practicebased model incorporates the business model of customer satisfaction with the clinical end point of HIV suppression. The study took place at 2 clinic sites. It primarily included a lowincome minority population, which often has low rates of adherence to care and worse clinical outcomes [44]. This population would stand to gain the most from interventions to improve adherence to care. This study has certain limitations. Although our study supports the proposed causal linkages between overall patient satisfaction, retention in HIV care, adherence to HAART, and HIV suppression, correlational data cannot provide definitive evidence of causality. Emerging consensus, however, suggests that such data, when examined through structural equation modeling, can help researchers articulate, clarify and evaluate causal explanations between constructs of interest [45]. Study eligibility required enrollment in clinic for at least one year and thus excluded patients new to HIV clinic. New clinic patients may have greater risk of being lost to follow-up. At the same time, new clinic patients have not formed any behavioral patterns of retention or adherence yet, may be more impressionable [46], and as a result, initial care experiences may have a greater effect on retention and adherence. At present, the relationship between satisfaction and adherence to HIV care in new clinic patients remains unclear. Furthermore, participants Ensartinib received HIV care at the VA and a public clinic, and study findings may not generalize to patients in other settings. Lastly, our model’s explanatory power is limited to its included constructs. Our model should be E-7438 manufacturer extended in further research by including other predictors of retention in HIV care and adherence to HAART (e.g. patient attributes like adherence self-efficacy andPatient Satisfaction to Improve HIV AdherenceFigure 2. Patient Satisfaction Model (N = 489). Values indicate standardized coefficients; * p,0.05; ** p,0.001. Estimation requires that one of the indicator loadings of a construct be constrained to 1.0. No direct test of statistical significance is possible for this reference item. Statistical significance is determined by estimating an identical second model, with the indicator constraint of 1.0 moved to a different indicator. Thus, all standardized coefficients can be tested for significance, even though one item must always be constrained in any single estimation. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0054729.goutcome expectations, provider attributes like adherence problem solving counseling skills, etc). The extension of our model to include these and other variables may clarify patient satisfaction’s relative contributio.Predictive of overall patient satisfaction may differ from those that may affect clinical outcomes. For example, provider training in problem solving focused adherence counseling techniques, as proposed in Wilson et al. [43], may have more influence on adherence than providers’ interpersonal and general communication skills. Future research directions need to include prospective quantitative studies to: 1) better understand which component or components of the care experience are most predictive of overall patient satisfaction, medication adherence and retention in 11967625 HIV care, 2) quantify how the strength of association changes over time as care progresses and what factors significantly influence those trends, and 3) establish causal direction. This study has several methodological strengths. Our practicebased model incorporates the business model of customer satisfaction with the clinical end point of HIV suppression. The study took place at 2 clinic sites. It primarily included a lowincome minority population, which often has low rates of adherence to care and worse clinical outcomes [44]. This population would stand to gain the most from interventions to improve adherence to care. This study has certain limitations. Although our study supports the proposed causal linkages between overall patient satisfaction, retention in HIV care, adherence to HAART, and HIV suppression, correlational data cannot provide definitive evidence of causality. Emerging consensus, however, suggests that such data, when examined through structural equation modeling, can help researchers articulate, clarify and evaluate causal explanations between constructs of interest [45]. Study eligibility required enrollment in clinic for at least one year and thus excluded patients new to HIV clinic. New clinic patients may have greater risk of being lost to follow-up. At the same time, new clinic patients have not formed any behavioral patterns of retention or adherence yet, may be more impressionable [46], and as a result, initial care experiences may have a greater effect on retention and adherence. At present, the relationship between satisfaction and adherence to HIV care in new clinic patients remains unclear. Furthermore, participants received HIV care at the VA and a public clinic, and study findings may not generalize to patients in other settings. Lastly, our model’s explanatory power is limited to its included constructs. Our model should be extended in further research by including other predictors of retention in HIV care and adherence to HAART (e.g. patient attributes like adherence self-efficacy andPatient Satisfaction to Improve HIV AdherenceFigure 2. Patient Satisfaction Model (N = 489). Values indicate standardized coefficients; * p,0.05; ** p,0.001. Estimation requires that one of the indicator loadings of a construct be constrained to 1.0. No direct test of statistical significance is possible for this reference item. Statistical significance is determined by estimating an identical second model, with the indicator constraint of 1.0 moved to a different indicator. Thus, all standardized coefficients can be tested for significance, even though one item must always be constrained in any single estimation. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0054729.goutcome expectations, provider attributes like adherence problem solving counseling skills, etc). The extension of our model to include these and other variables may clarify patient satisfaction’s relative contributio.