Suchergebnisse

AbstractIntroductionPost‐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.MethodsWe 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.ResultsNearly 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.DiscussionFindings 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.ConclusionsLessons from HCWs' experience in LMICs may inform understanding of PEP under‐use among people in these settings with non‐occupational exposures.

AbstractIntroductionMeasuring the coverage of HIV prevention services for key populations (KPs) has consistently been a challenge for national HIV programmes. The current frameworks and measurement methods lack emphasis on effective coverage, occur infrequently, lack timeliness and limit the participation of KPs. The Effective Programme Coverage framework, which utilizes a programme science approach, provides an opportunity to assess gaps in various coverage domains and explore the underlying reasons for these gaps, in order to develop targeted solutions. We have demonstrated the application of this framework in partnership with the KP community in Nairobi, Kenya, using an expanded Polling Booth Survey (ePBS) method.MethodsData were collected between April and May 2023 among female sex workers (FSWs) and men who have sex with men (MSM) using (a) PBS, (b) bio‐behavioural survey and (c) focus group discussions. Data collection and analysis involved both KP community and non‐community researchers. Descriptive analysis was performed, and proportions were used to assess the programme coverage gaps. The data were weighted to account for the sampling design and unequal selection probabilities. Thematic analysis was conducted on the qualitative data.ResultsThe condom programme for FSW and MSM had low availability (60.2% and 50.9%), contact (68.8% and 65.9%) and utilization (52.1% and 43.9%) coverages. The pre‐exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) programme had very low utilization coverage for FSW and MSM (4.4% and 2.8%), while antiretroviral therapy utilization coverage was higher (86.6% and 87.7%). Reasons for coverage gaps included a low peer educator‐to‐peer ratio, longer distance to the clinics, shortage of free condoms supplied by the government, experienced and anticipated side effects related to PrEP, and stigma and discrimination experienced in the facilities.ConclusionsThe Effective Programme Coverage framework allows programmes to assess coverage gaps and develop solutions and a research agenda targeted at specific domains of coverage with large gaps. The ePBS method works well in collecting data to understand coverage gaps rapidly and allows for the engagement of the KP community.