Suchergebnisse

AbstractIntroductionGeographic and transportation barriers are associated with poorer HIV‐related health outcomes in sub‐Saharan Africa, but data on the impact of these barriers on prevention interventions are limited. We estimated the association between distance to clinic and other transportation‐related barriers on pre‐exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) uptake and initial clinic visit attendance in a rural community in southwestern Uganda enrolled in the ongoing SEARCH study (NCT01864603).MethodsCommunity‐wide HIV testing was conducted and offered to adult (≥15 years) participants in Ruhoko. Participants were eligible for PrEP based on an empiric risk score, having an HIV‐discordant partner, or self‐referral at either the community health campaign or during home‐based testing from March to April 2017. We collected data from PrEP‐eligible households on GPS‐measured distance to clinic, walking time to clinic and road difficulty. A sample of participants was also asked to identify their primary barriers to PrEP use with a semi‐quantitative questionnaire. We used multivariable logistic regression to evaluate the association between transportation barriers and (1) PrEP uptake among PrEP‐eligible individuals and (2) four‐week clinic visit attendance among PrEP initiators.ResultsOf the 701 PrEP‐eligible participants, 272 (39%) started PrEP within four weeks; of these, 45 (17%) were retained at four weeks. Participants with a distance to clinic of ≥2 km were less likely to start PrEP (aOR 0.34; 95% CI 0.15 to 0.79, p = 0.012) and less likely to be retained on PrEP once initiated (aOR 0.29; 95% CI 0.10 to 0.84; p = 0.024). Participants who were deemed eligible during home‐based testing and did not have the option of same‐day PrEP start were also substantially less likely to initiate PrEP (aOR 0.16, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.37, p < 0.001). Of participants asked to name barriers to PrEP use (N = 98), the most frequently cited were "needing to take PrEP every day" (N = 18) and "low/no risk of getting HIV" (N = 18). Transportation‐related barriers, including "clinic is too far away" (N = 6) and "travel away from home" (N = 4) were also reported.ConclusionsDistance to clinic is a significant predictor of PrEP uptake and four‐week follow‐up visit attendance in a community in rural Uganda. Interventions that address geographic and transportation barriers may improve PrEP uptake and retention in sub‐Saharan Africa.

AbstractIntroductionPerson‐centred HIV prevention delivery models that offer structured choices in product, testing and visit location may increase coverage. However, data are lacking on the actual uptake of choices among persons at risk of HIV in southern Africa. In an ongoing randomized study (SEARCH; NCT04810650) in rural East Africa, we evaluated the uptake of choices made when offered in a person‐centred, dynamic choice model for HIV prevention.MethodsUsing the PRECEDE framework, we developed a persont‐centred, Dynamic Choice HIV Prevention (DCP) intervention for persons at risk of HIV in three settings in rural Kenya and Uganda: antenatal clinic (ANC), outpatient department (OPD) and in the community. Components include: provider training on product choice (predisposing); flexibility and responsiveness to client desires and choices (pre‐exposure prophylaxis [PrEP]/post‐exposure prophylaxis [PEP], clinic vs. off‐site visits and self‐ or clinician‐based HIV testing) (enabling); and client and staff feedback (reinforcing). All clients received a structured assessment of barriers with personalized plans to address them, mobile phone access to clinicians (24 hours/7 days/week) and integrated reproductive health services. In this interim analysis, we describe the uptake of choices of product, location and testing during the first 24 weeks of follow‐up (April 2021−March 2022).ResultsA total of 612 (203 ANC, 197 OPD and 212 community) participants were randomized to the person‐centred DCP intervention. We delivered the DCP intervention in all three settings with diverse populations: ANC: 39% pregnant; median age: 24 years; OPD: 39% male, median age 27 years; and community: 42% male, median age: 29 years. Baseline choice of PrEP was highest in ANC (98%) vs. OPD (84%) and community (40%); whereas the proportion of adults selecting PEP was higher in the community (46%) vs. OPD (8%) and ANC (1%). Personal preference for off‐site visits increased over time (65% at week 24 vs. 35% at baseline). Interest in alternative HIV testing modalities grew over time (38% baseline self‐testing vs. 58% at week 24).ConclusionsA person‐centred model incorporating structured choice in biomedical prevention and care delivery options in settings with demographically diverse groups, in rural Kenya and Uganda, was responsive to varying personal preferences over time in HIV prevention programmes.

AbstractIntroductionAntiretroviral‐based HIV prevention, including pre‐exposure prophylaxis (PrEP), is expanding in generalized epidemic settings, but additional prevention options are needed for individuals with periodic, high‐risk sexual exposures. Non‐occupational post‐exposure prophylaxis (PEP) is recommended in global guidelines. However, in Africa, awareness of and access to PEP for sexual exposures are limited. We assessed feasibility, acceptability, uptake and adherence in a pilot study of a patient‐centred PEP programme with options for facility‐ or community‐based service delivery.MethodsAfter population‐level HIV testing with universal access to PrEP for persons at elevated HIV risk (SEARCH Trial:NCT01864603), we conducted a pilot PEP study in five rural communities in Kenya and Uganda between December 2018 and May 2019. We assessed barriers to PEP in the population and implemented an intervention to address these barriers, building on existing in‐country PEP protocols. We used community leaders for sensitization. Test kits and medications were acquired through the Ministry of Health supply chain and healthcare providers based at the Ministry of Health clinics were trained on PEP delivery. Additional intervention components were (a)PEP availability seven days/week, (b)PEP hotline staffed by providers and (c)option for out‐of‐facility medication delivery. We assessed implementation using the Proctor framework and measured seroconversions via repeat HIV testing. Successful "PEP completion" was defined as self‐reported adherence over four weeks of therapy with post‐PEP HIV testing.ResultsCommunity leaders were able to sensitize and mobilize for PEP. The Ministry of Health supplied test kits and PEP medications; after training, healthcare providers delivered the 28‐day regimen with high completion rates. Among 124 persons who sought PEP, 66% were female, 24% were ≤25 years and 42% were fisherfolk. Of these, 20% reported exposure with a serodifferent partner, 72% with a new or existing relationship and 7% from transactional sex. 12% of all visits were conducted at out‐of‐facility community‐based sites; 35% of participants had ≥1 out‐of‐facility visit. No serious adverse events were reported. Overall, 85% met the definition of PEP completion. There were no HIV seroconversions.ConclusionsAmong individuals with elevated‐risk exposures in rural East African communities, patient‐centred PEP was feasible, acceptable and provides a promising addition to the current prevention toolkit.