Nonoccupational post-exposure prophylaxis for HIV in New York State Emergency Departments

Assessment of HIV-postexposure prophylaxis prescription quality after a training programme and assistance in decisions provided by a computer-based decision program: a cross-over study

BACKGROUND

Among the tools for preventing HIV transmission, post-exposureprophylaxis (PEP) is an effective means after potential HIV exposure.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate aPEP training program and acomputer-baseddecision program (CBDP) using simulated patients in emergency department (ED) on the quality of PEP prescription.

METHODS

This cross-overstudy, carried out from 7January2019 to 28June2019, included 20 ED physicians from 10 tertiary referral hospitals. Intervention consisted of two parts: Period Aassessed physicians' compliance with PEP prescription guidelines before and after atraining program, using 400 post-exposuremedical records (200 occupational and 200 non-occupational). Period Bconsisted of arandomized crossover study involving 40 simulated patients, with physicians using or not using aCBDP. Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of PEP prescription in accordance with the guidelines were assessed.

RESULTS

In period A, alpha Cronbach was less than 0.7 whereas it increased after the training to be >0.7. Sensitivity increased, especially for occupational patients ranging from 51.8%-66.6% to 70.4%-90.1%, whereas specificity increased for non-occupationalpatients ranging from 15.5%-51.9% to 52.1%-75.3%. In period B, sensitivity, specificity, and rate of complete assessments significantly increased (p < 0.0001) after the initiation of CBDP. Rate of PEP prescription significantly decreased (p < 0.001) for all subcategories.

CONCLUSION

Significant recommendations-discordantprescriptions, mainly overprescription, occurred for patients visiting ED for PEP. Training improved quality of PEP prescription but the reduction was modest. The availability of CBDP improved quality of PEP prescription and allowed for better data collection and reduction of PEP prescription.

Post-exposure prophylaxis for human immunodeficiency virus after sexual assault in a Midwestern U.S. emergency department

BACKGROUND

Emergency departments (EDs) play an essential role in the timely initiation of HIV post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) for sexual assault victims.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of sexual assault victims evaluated and offered HIV PEP in an urban academic ED between January 1, 2005 and January 1, 2018. Data on demographics, comorbidities, nature of sexual assault, initial ED care, subsequent healthcare utilization within 28 days of initial ED visit, and evidence of seroconversion within 6 months of the initial ED visit were obtained. Predictors of subsequent ED visit and follow-up in the infectious diseases clinic were evaluated using logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

Four hundred twenty-three ED visits met criteria for inclusion in this study. Median age at ED presentation was 25 years (IQR 21-34 years), with the majority of victims being female (95.5%), Black (63.4%), unemployed (66.3%) and uninsured (53.9%); psychiatric comorbidities (38.8%) and substance abuse (23.6%) were common. About 87% of the patients accepted HIV PEP (368 of 423 ED visits). Age (OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.94-0.99, p = 0.025) and sexual assault involving >1 assailant (OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.26-0.88, p = 0.018) were associated with lower likelihood of HIV PEP acceptance. Ten patients (2.7%) followed up with the infectious disease clinic within 28 days of starting HIV PEP; 70 patients (19%) returned to the ED for care during the same time period. Psychiatric comorbidity (OR 2.48, 95% CI 1.43-4.30, p = 0.001) and anal penetration (OR 2.02, 95% CI 1.10-3.70, p = 0.024) were associated with greater likelihood of repeat ED visit; female gender (OR 0.30, 95% CI 0.11-0.85, p = 0.023) was associated with lower likelihood of repeat visit. Completion of HIV PEP was documented for 14 (3.3%) individuals.

CONCLUSIONS

While ED patient acceptance of HIV PEP after sexual assault was high, infectious disease clinic follow-up and documented completion of PEP remained low. Innovative care models bridging EDs to outpatient clinics and community support services are needed to optimize transitions of care for sexual assault victims, including those receiving HIV PEP.

HIV post-exposure prophylaxis in the emergency department: An updated assessment and opportunities for HIV prevention identified

OBJECTIVES

Research suggests nonoccupational post exposure prophylaxis (nPEP) is under prescribed for people seeking treatment within 72 h of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) exposures in the emergency department (ED). This study is an assessment of ED prescribers' knowledge, attitudes and practices regarding administration of HIV nPEP.

METHODS

This was an anonymous survey based on literature review and modified Delphi technique. We approached 153 ED participants at work over a 4-month period from 5 hospital-based and 2 freestanding EDs. There were 152 completed surveys: 80 attendings, 27 residents, and 44 physician assistants.

RESULTS

The majority of those surveyed (133/149, 89.3%) believe it is their responsibility to provide HIV nPEP in the ED. Although 91% (138/151) and 87% (132/151) of participants are willing to prescribe nPEP for IV drug use and unprotected sex, respectively, only 40% (61/152) of participants felt they could confidently prescribe the appropriate regimen. Only 25% (37/151) of participants prescribed nPEP in the last year. Participants considered time (27%), connecting patients to follow-up (26%), and cost to patients (23%), as barriers to prescribing nPEP.

CONCLUSIONS

This study identified perceived barriers to administration of nPEP and missed opportunities for HIV prevention in the ED. Although most ED prescribers were willing to prescribe nPEP and felt it is their responsibility to do so, the majority of prescribers were not confident in prescribing it. The most commonly cited barriers to prescribing nPEP were time and access to follow-up care.

Post-exposure Prophylaxis Awareness, Knowledge, Access and Use Among Three Populations in New York City, 2016-17

Post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) is a cost-effective, but underused HIV prevention strategy. PEP awareness, knowledge, access, and usage was assessed among young men of color who have sex with men (YMSMOC; n = 177), transgender women (TW; n = 182), and cisgender women of color (CWOC; n = 170) in New York City. 59% were aware of PEP: 80% among YMSMOC, 63% among TW and 34% among CWOC (p < 0.001). 13% had ever used PEP. PEP awareness was higher among YMSMOC with a recent HIV test and lower among those with ≥ 4 partners. PEP awareness was lower among TW who anticipated stigma and reported barriers to taking PEP, and higher among TW who exchanged sex for resources. Among CWOC, more barriers to taking PEP reduced the odds of PEP awareness. PEP education and outreach needs to be deliberate about population-specific campaigns, with a need to focus on reducing PEP stigma and other barriers which impede PEP access.

Sexually transmitted infections and viral hepatitides in patients presenting for non-occupational HIV post-exposure prophylaxis: results of a prospective cohort study

Data evaluating the screening practices for viral hepatitides and sexually transmitted infections (STIs) in patients presenting for non-occupational HIV post-exposure prophylaxis (nPEP) care are limited. Screening practices and prevalences of viral hepatitides and STIs were evaluated in 126 patients presenting to a dedicated HIV prevention clinic for HIV nPEP. Three patients (2.4%) were diagnosed with chronic hepatitis C infection, 28 (22.2%) did not have surface antibodies in sufficient quantity to confer immunity to hepatitis B, and six (4.8%) were diagnosed with an STI. A multivariate regression model did not predict any demographic or clinical features predictive of HBV non-immunity. Beyond screening for HIV infection, evaluation for viral hepatitides and STIs is an important feature in the care of patients presenting for HIV nPEP.

Clinical challenges in HIV/AIDS: Hints for advancing prevention and patient management strategies

Acquired immune deficiency syndrome has been one of the most devastating epidemics of the last century. The current estimate for people living with the HIV is 36.9 million. Today, despite availability of potent and safe drugs for effective treatment, lifelong therapy is required for preventing HIV re-emergence from a pool of latently infected cells. However, recent evidence show the importance to expand HIV testing, to offer antiretroviral treatment to all infected individuals, and to ensure retention through all the cascade of care. In addition, circumcision, pre-exposure prophylaxis, and other biomedical tools are now available for included in a comprehensive preventive package. Use of all the available tools might allow cutting the HIV transmission in 2030. In this article, we review the status of the epidemic, the latest advances in prevention and treatment, the concept of treatment as prevention and the challenges and opportunities for the HIV cure agenda.