Search

Addressing women's low uptake of HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) requires improved understanding of their product preferences. Such preferences should be contextualized according to other aspects of their reproductive health, including their contraception practices. We investigated women's preferences across 10 PrEP modalities currently available or under study and examined associations between PrEP modality preferences and contraception practices. Heterosexually active women recently engaged in care at Connecticut Planned Parenthood centers (n = 563) completed an online survey. Participants were presented with images and descriptions of 10 PrEP modalities and asked to indicate their preference and specify their reasoning in an open-response format. Participants also reported prior and current use of 16 contraception modalities along with relationship, sexual health, and sociodemographic characteristics. The sample included women ages 18–45 (45.3% 25 or younger) who were predominantly non-Hispanic black (35.7%) or white (33.7%). All PrEP modalities presented were preferred by at least some women, with daily pills (24.9%), injections (24.3%), and invisible implants (14.9%) preferred most commonly. Across all modalities, associated reasoning often centered around ease of use and comfort. Coincidence with contraception modality was the third-most common reason underlying women's preferences. Women currently using the analogous contraception modality versus never having used it had higher odds of preferring PrEP daily pills [adjusted odds ratio (AOR) = 2.03], injections (AOR = 8.45), invisible implants (AOR = 11.63), and vaginal rings (AOR = 8.66). Diversification of available PrEP modalities and prioritization of those coinciding with popular contraception practices—especially daily pills, injections, and implants—could optimize PrEP acceptability, encourage PrEP uptake, and ultimately reduce HIV incidence among women. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Efforts to identify and address social inequities in HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) access are urgently needed. We investigated early-adopting PrEP prescribers' beliefs about how stigma contributes to PrEP access disparities in health care and explored potential intervention strategies within the context of PrEP service delivery. US-based PrEP prescribers were recruited through professional networks and participant referrals. Qualitative interviews were conducted, transcribed, and thematically analyzed. Participants (n = 18) were primarily male (72%); white (39%) or Asian (33%); and heterosexual (56%). Most practiced in the Northeastern (67%) or Southern (22%) United States; were physicians (94%); and specialized in HIV/infectious disease (89%). Participants described multiple forms of structural and interpersonal stigma impeding PrEP access. The requirement that PrEP be prescribed was a perceived deterrent for populations with medical mistrust and/or low health literacy. Practice norms such as discussing PrEP only in response to patient requests were seen as favoring more privileged groups. When probed about personally held biases, age-related stereotypes were the most readily acknowledged, including assumptions about older adults being sexually inactive and uncomfortable discussing sex. Participants criticized providers who chose not to prescribe PrEP within their clinical practice, particularly those whose decision reflected personal values related to condomless sex or discomfort communicating about sex with their patients. Suggested solutions included standardizing PrEP service delivery across patients and increasing cultural competence training. These early insights from a select sample of early-adopting providers illuminate mechanisms through which stigma could compromise PrEP access for key populations and corresponding points of intervention within the health care system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite the demonstrated effectiveness of HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) and evidence that most PrEP users do not engage in risk compensation (i.e., increased risk behavior due to a perceived decrease in HIV susceptibility), some healthcare providers report patient risk compensation to be a deterrent to prescribing PrEP. Overcoming this barrier is essential to supporting PrEP access and uptake among people at risk for HIV. To inform such efforts, this qualitative study explored PrEP-related risk compensation attitudes among providers with firsthand experience prescribing PrEP. US-based PrEP providers ( n = 18), most of whom were HIV specialists, were recruited through direct outreach and referral from colleagues and other participants. Individual 90-min semistructured interviews were conducted by phone or in person from September 2014 through February 2015, transcribed, and thematically analyzed. Three attitudinal themes emerged: (1) providers' role is to support patients in making informed decisions, (2) risk behavior while taking PrEP does not fully offset PrEP's protective benefit (i.e., PrEP confers net protection, even with added behavioral risk), and (3) PrEP-related risk compensation is unduly stigmatized within and beyond the healthcare community. Participants were critical of other healthcare providers' negative judgment of patients and reluctance to prescribe PrEP due to anticipated risk compensation. Several providers also acknowledged an evolution in their thinking from initial ambivalence toward greater acceptance of PrEP and PrEP-related behavior change. PrEP providers' insights about risk compensation may help to address unsubstantiated concerns about PrEP-related risk compensation and challenge the acceptability of withholding PrEP on these grounds. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]