AIDS patient care and STDs最新文献

Bimonthly long-acting injectable pre-exposure prophylaxis (LAI-PrEP) can become an important additional tool for HIV prevention among West African men who have sex with men (MSM). The objective was to explore the perceived added value of LAI-PrEP as an HIV prevention tool among MSM in Burkina Faso, Côte d'Ivoire, Mali, and Togo. We conducted eight focus group discussions among 62 HIV-negative MSM between April and May 2021. Participants were recruited via local community-based clinics. Data collection and analysis were guided by grounded theory and community-based participatory approaches. Participants were generally knowledgeable about HIV, and explained particular barriers for HIV prevention in their communities (e.g., denial of HIV). The added value of LAI-PrEP relative to condoms was similar to oral pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) in terms of perceived advantages (e.g., improved sexual satisfaction) or disadvantages (e.g., no protection against other sexually transmitted infections). Compared with oral PrEP, LAI-PrEP was perceived to provide better protection against HIV and to be more convenient (e.g., no need to be mindful of intake and less risk for stigma). Concerns included fear of needles, doubts about efficacy, potential side effects, and difficulties for ensuring timely injections (e.g., when traveling abroad). The results demonstrate that injectable PrEP can be of particular interest to subgroups of West African MSM, although existing HIV prevention tools such as condoms and oral PrEP will remain valuable alongside of, or instead of, LAI-PrEP. Increasing awareness about HIV and tackling discrimination based on sexual orientation continue to be crucial factors to be addressed for HIV prevention.

To ensure care continuity during the COVID-19 pandemic, telehealth has been widely implemented in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) care. However, participation in and benefits from telehealth were unequal. This study aims to assess the willingness of people living with HIV (PWH) and HIV care providers to use telehealth and perceptions of the future role of telehealth. In-depth interviews with 18 PWH and 10 HIV care providers from South Carolina assessed their willingness to use telehealth, their perspectives on the future of telehealth in HIV care, and recommendations to improve telehealth. Interviews were analyzed using thematic analysis. Most PWH were female (61%), Black/African American (67%), and non-Hispanic (78%). Most PWH (61%) and all providers had used telehealth for HIV care. Most PWH and all providers reported being willing to use or (re-)consider telehealth HIV care services in the future. Providers suggested that telehealth is most suitable for routine HIV care encounters and for established, clinically stable, generally healthy PWH. Attitudes toward telehealth were heterogeneous, with most interviewees valuing telehealth similarly or superior to in-person care, yet >20% perceiving it less valuable. Recommendations to improve telehealth included multilevel strategies to address challenges across four domains: technology, the virtual nature of telehealth, administrative processes, and the sociodemographic profile of PWH. Telehealth in HIV care is here to stay; however, it may not yet be suitable for all PWH and all care encounters. Decision processes related to telehealth versus in-person care need to involve providers and PWH. Existing telehealth options require multilevel adjustments addressing persistent challenges.

Cabotegravir long-acting injectable HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (LA PrEP) is efficacious, with a good safety profile, and was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration in December 2021. Understanding variations in potential user preferences for LA PrEP may inform implementation and subsequently improve uptake and community-level effectiveness. HIV-negative, sexually active men who have sex with men (MSM) aged ≥15 years were recruited online for the 2019 American Men's Internet Survey, before LA PrEP approval. Respondents completed a discrete-choice experiment (DCE) with hypothetical LA PrEP attributes (out-of-pocket cost, perceived side effects, injection frequency, perceived stigma, service location). Latent class analysis segmented respondents into groups based on their preferences for the attributes presented, and relative importance of preference weights and willingness-to-pay were calculated. While the majority had never used daily oral PrEP, 73% of the 2489 respondents were very or somewhat likely to use LA PrEP. Three latent classes were identified from 2241 respondents in the DCE. The "side effects-averse" class was the largest group (64% of respondents) and placed 61% relative importance on side effects. The "ambivalent" class (20% of respondents) placed higher importance on stigma (17% of relative importance) than other classes. The "cost-conscious" class (16% of respondents) placed higher relative importance (62%) on cost compared with other attributes and classes. Perceived side effects were an important hypothetical barrier for LA PrEP uptake among a large proportion of potential MSM users. Minimizing out-of-pocket costs is likely to increase uptake and may be important to equitable access. Tailored communication strategies are recommended for the different groups of potential LA PrEP users.

To test the hypothesis that implementation of a multicomponent, educational HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) intervention to promote universal PrEP services for cisgender women (subsequently "women") in sexual and reproductive health centers would improve the proportion of women screened, offered, and prescribed PrEP, we implemented a multicomponent, educational intervention in a Washington D.C. Department of Health-sponsored sexual health clinic. The clinic serves a patient population with high-potential exposure to HIV. The intervention included clinic-wide PrEP trainings, an electronic health record prompt for PrEP counseling by providers, and educational videos in the waiting room. We collected preimplementation data from March 22, 2018 to July 4, 2018, including 331 clinical encounters for 329 women. Between July 5, 2018 and July 1, 2019, there were 1733 clinical encounters for 1720 HIV-negative women. We used mixed methods to systematically assess intervention implementation using the Reach Effectiveness Adoption Implementation Maintenance framework. Additionally, we assessed the interventions' acceptability and feasibility among providers through semistructured interviews. The proportion of women screened by providers for PrEP (5.6% preimplementation to a mean of 89.2% of women during the implementation period, p < 0.01), offered (6.2 to 69.8%, p < 0.01), and prescribed PrEP (2.6 to 8.1%, p < 0.01) by providers increased significantly in the implementation period. Providers and clinic staff found the intervention both highly feasible and acceptable and demonstrated increased knowledge of PrEP and HIV prevention associated with the clinic-wide trainings. Our results demonstrate the effectiveness of a low-cost educational intervention to increase provision of integrated PrEP services in an urban sexual health clinic serving women with high-potential exposure to HIV. ClinicalTrials.gov ID NCT03705663.

People living with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) are at high risk for anal cancer. Anal cancer screenings are recommended annually for US veterans with HIV. Screenings can identify treatable precursor lesions and prevent cancer development. In a previous study, we found screening rate to be only 15%. Semistructured interviews were conducted with Veterans Affairs (VA) providers who treat veterans living with HIV. Participants described their experiences with anal cancer screenings. Researchers developed a codebook based on Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) and coded data using thematic analysis to identify barriers to anal cancer screenings. Twenty-three interviews were conducted with VA providers representing 10 regions. Barriers identified corresponded with five targetable TDF domains: Knowledge, Skills, Environmental Context/Resources, Professional Roles/Identities, and Social Influence. Many providers lacked knowledge of screening protocols. Knowledgeable providers often lacked needed resources, including swabs, clinic space, reliable pathology, access to high-resolution anoscopy, or leadership support to implement a screening program. Providers mentioned competing priorities in the care of veterans with HIV infection and lack of skilled/trained personnel to perform the tests. It was often unclear which provider specialty should "own" screening responsibilities. Additional factors included patient discomfort with screening exams. Anal cancer screening protocols are recommended but not widely adopted in VA. There is a critical need to address barriers to anal cancer screenings in veterans. The TDF domains identified align with five intervention domains to target, including education, training, resource/environment, delineation of provider roles, and improved counseling efforts. Targeting these barriers may help improve the uptake of anal cancer screenings within VA.