Occupational Exposure to Blood and Body Fluids and Knowledge of HIV Post-Exposure Prophylaxis among Medical and Allied Health Students in Northern Nigeria

Occupational post-exposure prophylaxis among healthcare workers: a scoping review of factors affecting optimal utilization

INTRODUCTION

Post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) is an efficacious prevention method when initiated promptly after an HIV exposure. Yet, PEP has been underutilized, even among healthcare workers (HCWs) with occupational exposure in sites with PEP policies and procedures and access to PEP medications. It is important to understand the dynamics of uneven PEP use in what appears to be an optimal context to better protect the health and wellbeing of HCWs.

METHODS

We conducted a scoping review to elucidate factors influencing HCWs' use of PEP after occupational exposure. We searched PubMed, PsychInfo and Google Scholar for peer-reviewed literature published in English from 2014 to 2022 using the terms HIV, postexposure/post-exposure prophylaxis, acceptability, healthcare workers, and values and preferences. An inductive narrative review of the resulting 53 studies identified core themes.

RESULTS

Nearly all studies (96%) with various HCW types and settings occurred in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) in Africa and Asia. Identified themes arrayed along a trajectory of PEP use experience: awareness/knowledge; acceptability; availability/access; uptake/use; adherence/completion. Across studies, awareness of PEP for HIV prevention was high, knowledge about drug regimens and healthcare facility policies was moderate to low; acceptability of PEP was moderate to high; PEP's perceived accessibility/availability was inconsistent and varied by geographic location and setting; HCWs' uptake of PEP was low, affected by not knowing how to report an exposure and being unaware of PEP availability; and adherence/completion of PEP regimens was moderate to low, impeded by side effects and a belief that completing regimens was unnecessary to avert seroconversion. HCWs consistently expressed concern about HIV stigma.

DISCUSSION

Findings are limited by the inconsistent use of constructs across studies and a lack of clarity about reporting exposure events. Multi-level approaches are needed to address the interplay of individual, social and structural barriers that diminish HCWs' PEP use. Improved training, incident reporting, 24-hour access to non-stigmatizing PEP services and monitoring of adherence/completion are essential to optimizing HCWs' PEP use.

CONCLUSIONS

Lessons from HCWs' experience in LMICs may inform understanding of PEP under-use among people in these settings with non-occupational exposures.

Patterns of Occupational Exposure to Human Immunodeficiency Virus and Post-Exposure Prophylaxis Among Health Care Personnel in a Tertiary Care Institute in South India - A Retrospective Case Series

Background

Post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) for occupational human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) exposure involves the comprehensive measures used to prevent transmission of blood-borne pathogens such as HIV, hepatitis B virus, and hepatitis C virus through various strategies such as first aid, counseling, risk assessment, relevant laboratory investigations with informed consent, the provision of short-term anti-retroviral drugs, and follow-up testing.

Aim and Objectives

We sought to investigate the patterns and causes of occupational exposure in health care workers (HCWs) in our institute and the usage of PEP in our center, a tertiary care hospital in south India.

Materials and Methods

The study involved a retrospective analysis of data extracted from the records of PEP usage from the anti-retroviral treatment (ART) center attached to the dermatology, venereology and leprosy out-patient department of a tertiary care center in south India. The data were extracted into a pre-designed proforma and analyzed using descriptive statistics.

Results

A total of 352 health care professionals reported to the ART center for PEP from 2010 to 2020. One hundred and thirty-four patients took only the first dose as the source patient later tested to be HIV-negative. Among the 218 remaining patients, 84 were male and 134 were female patients. Only 56 health care workers started the regimen within 2 hours. One hundred and thirty-four patients completed the full course of PEP. Most HCWs (n = 68, 31%) sustained the exposure while doing a procedure on the patient followed by re-capping a needle (n = 64, 29%). Gastritis and drowsiness were the most common adverse effects.

Limitations and Conclusions

The study was limited by the retrospective nature of data collection and the lack of detailed interviews with HCWs. Knowledge about PEP, needle safety training, and training of early first aid measures should be increased among health care workers.

Occupational exposure to HIV and utilization of post-exposure prophylaxis among healthcare workers at St. Peter's specialized hospital in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

Healthcare workers are susceptible to blood borne pathogens, such as human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). Occupational exposure to HIV infection among healthcare workers is becoming a global public health concern. However, there is limited evidence about occupational exposure of healthcare workers to HIV and utilization of post-exposure prophylaxis in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Accordingly, this study was conducted to assess the prevalence of occupational exposure to HIV and utilization of post exposure prophylaxis among healthcare workers at St. Peter's specialized hospital, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. A health facility-based cross-sectional study was conducted among 308 randomly selected healthcare workers in April 2022. Structured and pretested self-administered questioner was used to collect data. Occupational exposure to HIV was taken as any percutaneous injury or blood or other body fluids exposure while administering medications, specimen collection, and other procedures with HIV confirmed patients. Multivariable binary logistic regression analysis was used to identify factors associated with occupational exposure to HIV and utilization of post-exposure prophylaxis. Statistically significant association was declared on the basis of adjusted odds ratio with 95% confidence interval and p-value less than 0.05. The study found that 42.3% (95% CI 36.6, 47.9%) of the healthcare workers had occupational exposure to HIV during their career time, out of whom 16.1% (95% CI 11.9, 20.3%) used post-exposure prophylaxis. Healthcare workers with lower-level education such as diploma (AOR: 0.41, 95% CI 0.17, 0.96) and BSc (AOR: 0.51, 95% CI 0.26, 0.92), and healthcare workers who received infection prevention training (AOR: 0.55, 95% CI 0.33, 0.90) had less risk of exposure to HIV. On the other hand, nurses (AOR: 1.98, 95% CI 1.07, 3.67), midwifes (AOR: 3.79, 95% CI 1.21, 11.9), and physicians (AOR: 2.11, 95% CI 1.05, 4.22) had high risk of exposure to HIV compared with other professionals. Moreover, healthcare workers with BSc degree compared with healthcare workers with masters degree (AOR: 3.69, 95% CI 1.08, 12.6), healthcare workers with long service year (AOR: 3.75, 95% CI 1.64, 8.57), and healthcare workers who are working in facilities where prophylaxis is available (AOR: 3.41, 95% CI 1.47, 7.91) had higher odds to utilize post-exposure prophylaxis. Significant proportion of healthcare workers included in the current study had occupational exposure to HIV and very few of them used post-exposure prophylaxis. Healthcare workers need to use appropriate personal protective equipment, safely manage contaminated equipment, and safely administered medications and collect specimen to protect themselves from exposure to HIV. Moreover, use of post-exposure prophylaxis should be promoted when exposure exists.

Healthcare Professionals’ Practice of HIV Post-Exposure Prophylaxis in Clinical Settings in Karachi, Pakistan

The human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) is an important public health concern that has become more prevalent in Pakistan in recent decades. Healthcare professionals (HCPs) are frequently exposed to many HIV-infected patients; as a result, they are more vulnerable to HIV infection due to occupational exposure. Hence, the current study was executed to evaluate HCPs’ knowledge, attitude and practice in terms of post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) for HIV. This cross-sectional study was carried out in several clinical and laboratory settings of Karachi and the HCPs involved in treating patients were surveyed using a structured questionnaire. The Shapiro–Wilk test was performed to establish the normality of the variables. Pearson correlation was employed to identify the relationship between the independent variables considering p-values < 0.05 as statistically significant. A total of 578 filled forms were incorporated in the study with a response rate of 72.2%. Physicians and medical students (OR = 1.68; 95% CI = 1.16–2.24; p = 0.001) belonging to private work settings (OR = 1.84; 95% CI = 1.33–2.35; p < 0.003) indicated better knowledge. The majority, 407 (70.4%), of the respondents reported having been exposed to risky occupational circumstances during their professional life; however, 65.7% took PEP for HIV after exposure and only 56.8% completed the entire course. A statistically significant association was observed between experience (p = 0.004, CI = 0.14–0.72), job category (p = 0.0001, CI = 0.16–0.62) and frequency of exposure (p = 0.003, CI = 0.42–11.31) and reporting of occupational exposure. More than half (53.8%) of respondents stated that their institute has a policy for the management of HIV exposures; however, their response was significantly associated with their organization (p = 0.004). The current study shows adequate knowledge revealing a positive attitude among respondents; however, there was a gap between the knowledge and its practical application. Even though many of the HCPs had experienced risky HIV exposure, a lack of reporting was noted in the study.