1
|
Groot Bruinderink ML, Boyd A, Coyer L, Boers S, Blitz L, Brand JM, Götz HM, Stip M, Woudstra J, Yap K, Vermey K, Matser A, Feddes AR, Jongen VW, Prins M, Hoornenborg E, van Harreveld F, Schim van der Loeff MF, Davidovich U. Online-Mediated HIV Pre-exposure Prophylaxis Care and Reduced Monitoring Frequency for Men Who Have Sex With Men: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Noninferiority Trial (EZI-PrEP Study). JMIR Res Protoc 2023; 12:e51023. [PMID: 37938875 PMCID: PMC10666015 DOI: 10.2196/51023] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/20/2023] [Revised: 09/15/2023] [Accepted: 09/18/2023] [Indexed: 11/10/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Daily and event-driven HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) with oral tenofovir-emtricitabine is highly effective to prevent HIV in men who have sex with men (MSM). PrEP care generally consists of in-clinic monitoring every 3 months that includes PrEP dispensing, counseling, and screening for HIV and sexually transmitted infections (STIs). However, the optimal frequency for monitoring remains undetermined. Attending a clinic every 3 months for monitoring may be a barrier for PrEP. Online-mediated PrEP care and reduced frequency of monitoring may lower this barrier. OBJECTIVE The primary objective of this study is to establish the noninferiority of online PrEP care (vs in-clinic care) and monitoring every 6 months (vs every 3 months). The secondary objectives are to (1) examine differences between PrEP care modalities regarding incidences of STIs, HIV infection, and hepatitis C virus infection; retention in PrEP care; intracellular tenofovir-diphosphate concentration; and satisfaction, usability, and acceptability of PrEP care modalities; and (2) evaluate associations of these study outcomes with sociodemographic, behavioral, and psychological characteristics. METHODS This study is a 2×2 factorial, 4-arm, open-label, multi-center, randomized, controlled, noninferiority trial. The 4 arms are (1) in-clinic monitoring every 3 months, (2) in-clinic monitoring every 6 months, (3) online monitoring every 3 months, and (4) online monitoring every 6 months. The primary outcome is a condomless anal sex act with a casual partner not covered or insufficiently covered by PrEP (ie, "unprotected act") as a proxy for HIV infection risk. Eligible individuals are MSM, and transgender and gender diverse people aged ≥18 years who are eligible for PrEP care at 1 of 4 participating sexual health centers in the Netherlands. The required sample size is 442 participants, and the planned observation time is 24 months. All study participants will receive access to a smartphone app, which contains a diary. Participants are requested to complete the diary on a daily basis during the first 18 months of participation. Participants will complete questionnaires at baseline and 6, 12, 18, and 24 months. Dried blood spots will be collected at 6 and 12 months for assessment of intracellular tenofovir-diphosphate concentration. Incidence rates of unprotected acts will be compared between the online and in-clinic arms, and between the 6-month and 3-month arms. Noninferiority will be concluded if the upper limit of the 2-sided 97.5% CI of the incidence rate ratio is <1.8. RESULTS The results of the main analysis are expected in 2024. CONCLUSIONS This trial will demonstrate whether online PrEP care and monitoring every 6 months is noninferior to standard PrEP care in terms of PrEP adherence. If noninferiority is established, these modalities may lower barriers for initiating and continuing PrEP use and potentially reduce the systemic burden for PrEP providers. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05093036; https://tinyurl.com/28b8ndvj. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID) DERR1-10.2196/51023.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marije L Groot Bruinderink
- Department of Infectious Diseases, Public Health Service of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
- Department of Psychology, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Anders Boyd
- Department of Infectious Diseases, Public Health Service of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
- HIV Monitoring Foundation, Amsterdan, Netherlands
| | - Liza Coyer
- Department of Infectious Diseases, Public Health Service of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Sophie Boers
- Department of Sexual Health, Public Health Service of Gelderland-Zuid, Nijmegen, Netherlands
| | - Laura Blitz
- Department of Sexual Health, Public Health Service of Haaglanden, The Hague, Netherlands
| | - Jean-Marie Brand
- Department of Sexual Health, Public Health Service of Haaglanden, The Hague, Netherlands
| | - Hannelore M Götz
- Department of Infectious Diseases, Public Health Service of Rotterdam-Rijnmond, Rotterdam, Netherlands
- Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands
| | - Martijn Stip
- Department of Infectious Diseases, Public Health Service of Rotterdam-Rijnmond, Rotterdam, Netherlands
| | - Joey Woudstra
- Department of Infectious Diseases, Public Health Service of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Kenneth Yap
- Department of Infectious Diseases, Public Health Service of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | | | - Amy Matser
- Department of Infectious Diseases, Public Health Service of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
- Amsterdam Institute for Infection & Immunity, Department of Infectious Diseases, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Allard R Feddes
- Department of Psychology, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Vita W Jongen
- Department of Infectious Diseases, Public Health Service of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
- HIV Monitoring Foundation, Amsterdan, Netherlands
| | - Maria Prins
- Department of Infectious Diseases, Public Health Service of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
- Amsterdam Institute for Infection & Immunity, Department of Infectious Diseases, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Elske Hoornenborg
- Department of Infectious Diseases, Public Health Service of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
- Amsterdam Institute for Infection & Immunity, Department of Infectious Diseases, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Frenk van Harreveld
- Department of Psychology, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
- National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven, Netherlands
| | - Maarten F Schim van der Loeff
- Department of Infectious Diseases, Public Health Service of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
- Amsterdam Institute for Infection & Immunity, Department of Infectious Diseases, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Udi Davidovich
- Department of Infectious Diseases, Public Health Service of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
- Department of Psychology, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
de Beurs E, Rademacher C, Blankers M, Peen J, Dekker J, Goudriaan A. Alcohol use disorder treatment via video conferencing compared with in-person therapy during COVID-19 social distancing : A non-inferiority comparison of three cohorts. ALCOHOL, CLINICAL & EXPERIMENTAL RESEARCH 2023; 47:2208-2217. [PMID: 38226749 DOI: 10.1111/acer.15184] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/06/2023] [Revised: 08/28/2023] [Accepted: 08/28/2023] [Indexed: 01/17/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Social distancing measures during the COVID-19 pandemic forced an abrupt transformation of treatment delivery for mental health care. In mid-March 2020, nearly all in-person contact was replaced with video conferencing. The pandemic thus offered a natural experiment and a unique opportunity to conduct an observational study of whether alcohol use disorder treatment through video conferencing is non-inferior to in-person treatment. METHODS In a large urban substance use disorder treatment center in the Netherlands, treatment evaluation is routine practice. Outcome data are regularly collected to support shared decision making and monitor patient progress. For this study, pre-test and post-test data on alcohol use (Measurements in the Addictions for Triage and Evaluation), psychopathology (Depression Anxiety Stress Scales), and quality of life (Manchester Short Assessment of Quality of Life) were used to compare outcomes of cognitive behavioral therapy treatment for three cohorts: patients who received treatment for a primary alcohol use disorder performed prior to (n = 628), partially during (n = 557), and entirely during (n = 653) the COVID-19 lockdown. RESULTS Outcome was similar across the three cohorts: No inferior outcomes were found for treatments that were conducted predominantly through video conferencing during lockdown or treatments that started in-person, but were continued through video conferencing, compared to in-person treatments that were conducted prior to COVID-19. The number of drop-outs were also similar between cohorts. However, there was a difference in average treatment intensity between cohorts, with treatment partially or fully conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic lasting longer. CONCLUSIONS Treatment for a primary alcohol use disorder, provided partially or predominantly through video conferencing during the COVID-19 pandemic resulted in abstinence rates and secondary outcomes similar to traditional in-person care, in spite of the potentially negative effects of the COVID-related lockdown measures themselves. These results from everyday clinical practice corroborate findings of randomized controlled studies and meta-analyses in which video conferencing appeared non-inferior to in-person care in clinical effectiveness.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Edwin de Beurs
- Department of Clinical Psychology, University of Leiden, Leiden, The Netherlands
- Arkin GGZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Clara Rademacher
- Department of Clinical Psychology, University of Leiden, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Matthijs Blankers
- Arkin GGZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Psychiatry, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Trimbos Institute, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Jaap Peen
- Arkin GGZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Jack Dekker
- Arkin GGZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Clinical Psychology, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Anneke Goudriaan
- Arkin GGZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Amsterdam Institute for Addiction Research, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Psychiatry, Amsterdam University Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|