PrEP Knowledge and Attitudes Among Adults Attending Public Health Clinics in Southern Arizona

Identifying HIV PrEP Attributes to Increase PrEP Use Among Different Groups of Gay, Bisexual, and Other Men Who Have Sex with Men: A Latent Class Analysis of a Discrete Choice Experiment

Daily pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is highly effective at preventing HIV among gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (GBMSM), although uptake remains suboptimal. By identifying the features of PrEP that appeal to various subgroups of GBMSM, this study aimed to improve PrEP uptake by examining preferences for PrEP use. Adults ≥ 18 years old in six New England states completed an online discrete choice experiment survey. A latent class analysis (LCA) was conducted to identify groups of GBMSM based on four attributes of choices for PrEP (cost, time, side effects, and mode of administration). Multinominal logistic regression was conducted to compare the association between sociodemographic and behavioral characteristics and class memberships. Data from 675 GBMSM were analyzed. A 3-Class model was selected as the best fit model. Class 1 (47.7% of individuals) was identified as having "no specific preferences". Class 2 (18.5% of individuals) were "Cost- and time-conscious" and were significantly more likely to be older, have prior sexually transmitted infection (STI) testing, have low household income, private insurance, and have extreme concerns about HIV risk than those with no specific preference (Class 1). Finally, Class 3 (34.1% of individuals) were "Side effects-conscious" and were more likely to have low income, private insurance, and have moderate and extreme concerns about HIV risk than those with no specific preference (Class 1). Findings indicate that outreach to GBMSM who have never used PrEP should emphasize low cost and short travel times to increase potential PrEP use.

Provision of HIV preexposure prophylaxis to female patients seeking family planning services in the United States

OBJECTIVE

We conducted a scoping review to assess barriers to and facilitators of integrating HIV preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) and family planning (FP) at the patient, provider, and implementation levels, and to identify gaps in knowledge.

METHODS

We conducted a search of five bibliographic databases from database inception to March 2022: PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, Web of Science and Scopus. Two reviewers screened abstracts and full texts to determine eligibility based on a priori inclusion and exclusion criteria. We categorized studies by their relevance to patient, provider, and implementation barriers, and extracted data based on prespecified elements.

RESULTS

Our initial search strategy yielded 1151 results, and 34 publications were included. Barriers to PrEP implementation in family planning settings included low PrEP knowledge among patients, hesitance to take PrEP due to perceived stigma, decreased willingness of providers unfamiliar with PrEP to prescribe PrEP, and limited financial and staffing resources that make prescribing and monitoring PrEP difficult. Facilitators included robust training for providers, stigma reduction efforts, leadership engagement, and increased resources specifically in settings with processes in place that ease the process of prescribing and monitoring PrEP.

CONCLUSIONS

Advances in implementation strategy development, stigma reduction, and drug development will be essential to reinforcing PrEP care in family planning settings and thereby reducing the incidence of HIV in women through highly effective pharmacologic HIV prevention methods.

PrEP Familiarity, Interest, and Usage Among 364 Black and Hispanic Adults in Indiana

Pre-exposure prophylaxis, or PrEP, is a once-daily preventative prescription pill against HIV for adults or adolescents who have sex or inject drugs. PrEP may be especially useful among Black and Hispanic Americans, who are particularly at risk for HIV in the United States. In spite of this vulnerability, rates of PrEP use in Black and Hispanic communities are low. Here, we examined familiarity with, prior usage of, and future interest in PrEP among 364 Black and Hispanic Indiana residents. Indiana is an important context for this work, due to severe HIV outbreaks in the area over the last 8 years. Around half of all participants had never heard of PrEP, with Hispanic participants being less familiar than Black participants. Prior PrEP use was low, at around 10%, and was lower for Hispanic than Black participants. Around 21% of all participants reported interest in PrEP after learning of it in our study. Further, participants identified strategies that would make discussions about PrEP with a medical provider more comfortable. Black and Hispanic participants reported feeling the most comfortable with addressing PrEP usage with providers if: (a) the provider was the one who brought up the subject of PrEP, (b) there was written information available to the patient (i.e., brochures), and (c) the patient already knew they qualified for the prescription in terms of personal eligibility and insurance coverage. Additional provider and patient education, as well as openness on the part of the provider, can help to lessen the disparities associated with PrEP need and actual PrEP usage.

Predictors of HIV Preexposure Prophylaxis Initiation Among Public Health Clients in Rural and Small Urban Areas in Iowa

OBJECTIVE

Preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is a safe and effective method for HIV prevention, but little is known about PrEP uptake in rural and small urban areas. We described rates and predictors of HIV PrEP initiation among public health clients in rural and small urban areas in Iowa.

METHODS

This was a prospective cohort study of clients with PrEP indications served by HIV testing and disease intervention specialist/partner services (DIS/PS) programs in public health departments in Iowa from February 1, 2018, through February 28, 2019. Eligible participants were aged 18-70 and referred for PrEP by public health personnel. Participants completed surveys at enrollment addressing demographic characteristics; sexual history; previous drug use; PrEP experiences; and knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs about PrEP. A follow-up survey assessed PrEP initiation at 30 days. We compared baseline characteristics of PrEP initiators and non-initiators.

RESULTS

Two hundred thirty-four public health clients consented to participate in the study; 189 completed the baseline survey, and 117 (61.9%) completed the follow-up survey. The mean age of participants in the baseline survey was 30 (range, 18-68); 109 (57.7%) were male, 127 (67.2%) were White, and 169 (89.4%) lived in a rural or small urban area. Of 117 participants in the follow-up survey, those who initiated PrEP were significantly more likely than those who did not initiate PrEP to be referred by DIS/PS programs (46.7% vs 7.8%, P < .001) and to recognize that PrEP was ≥90% effective (86.7% vs 35.3%, P = .001). No PrEP initiators and 8 PrEP non-initiators agreed that PrEP is for promiscuous people (0% vs 7.8%, P = .04). Perceived PrEP stigma was low and not associated with PrEP initiation.

CONCLUSIONS

PrEP initiation rates were low among rural and small urban health department clients. Interventions are needed to improve linkage to PrEP among rural and small urban public health clients.

Barriers to the Wider Use of Pre-exposure Prophylaxis in the United States: A Narrative Review

Antiretroviral pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) to prevent HIV transmission was first approved by the US Food and Drug Administration in 2012. Despite correlations of decreases in new HIV infections being greatest where PrEP has been deployed, the uptake of PrEP is lagging, particularly among populations with disproportionate HIV burden. This narrative review seeks to identify individual and systemic barriers to PrEP usage in the USA. A comprehensive search of recent literature uncovered a complex array of structural, social, clinical, and behavioral barriers, including knowledge/awareness of PrEP, perception of HIV risk, stigma from healthcare providers or family/partners/friends, distrust of healthcare providers/systems, access to PrEP, costs of PrEP, and concerns around PrEP side effects/medication interactions. Importantly, these barriers may have different effects on specific populations at risk. The full potential of PrEP for HIV prevention will not be realized until these issues are addressed. Strategies to achieve this goal should include educational interventions, innovative approaches to delivery of HIV care, financial support, and destigmatization of PrEP and PrEP users. Until then, PrEP uptake will continue to be suboptimal, particularly among those who need it most.