Article

Awareness of post-exposure HIV prophylaxis in high-risk men who have sex with men in New York City.

Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, NewYork University School of Medicine, New York, New York, USA.
Sexually transmitted infections (Impact Factor: 3.08). 02/2011; 87(4):344-8. DOI: 10.1136/sti.2010.046284
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT To understand the factors associated with knowledge of non-occupational post-exposure prophylaxis (nPEP) and pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP), bathhouse patrons in New York City (NYC) were surveyed.
554 men who have sex with men (MSM) at two NYC bathhouses were given a standardised survey focused on nPEP and PrEP at the time of HIV testing.
In the previous 90 days, 63% of respondents reported unprotected sex with a male partner and 7% reported any sex with a known HIV-positive male partner. Less than half reported having a primary provider (primary care practitioner) who was aware of their MSM behaviour. 201 men (36%) were aware of nPEP or PrEP. In univariate analyses, race/ethnicity, previous HIV testing, gay self-identification, higher education level, having a primary provider aware of MSM behaviour, reported interaction with the healthcare system, use of the internet for meeting sex partners, reporting unprotected sex in the previous 90 days, reporting any sex with an HIV-positive male partner in the previous 90 days and having a higher number of sex partners were each significantly associated with being aware of nPEP or PrEP. In multivariate analysis, having a higher number of sex partners was significantly associated (OR 5.10, p=0.02) with post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP)/PrEP knowledge and disclosure to a primary care provider was also associated, although less robustly (OR 2.10, p=0.06).
Knowledge of nPEP or PrEP among sexually active MSM in NYC is low and is associated with having a primary provider aware of their patient's same-sex behaviours. These findings show the need for improving education about nPEP among high-risk MSM in NYC and the role of providers in these efforts.

1 Follower
 · 
143 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Abstract Non-occupational post-exposure prophylaxis (NPEP) has been recommended to prevent HIV acquisition for nearly 20 years. However, limited behavioral and clinical outcome data exist after men who have sex with men (MSM) present for NPEP. We reviewed the electronic medical records of HIV-uninfected adults who presented for NPEP at a large community health center in Boston between July, 1997 and August, 2013. Data from 894 patients were analyzed, 88.1% of whom were MSM. Consensual unprotected sex was the most common reason for NPEP visits among MSM (64.2%), followed by condom failure (30.6%). The HIV serostatus of the partner was unknown for 64.4% of the MSM, positive with unknown treatment status for 18.1%, positive and not on treatment for 4.1%, and positive and on treatment for 13.4%. Thirty-nine patients subsequently became HIV-infected (4.4%), all of whom were MSM. The MSM-specific HIV incidence after NPEP use was 2.2 cases per 100 person-years. Incident HIV infection was associated with younger age (AHR=0.94; p=0.003), being Latino (AHR=2.44; p=0.044), and/or being African American (AHR=3.43; p=0.046). Repeated NPEP use was not associated with incident HIV infection (AHR=0.67; p=0.26). Younger MSM of color who access NPEP, in particular, may benefit from early HIV risk-reduction and pre-exposure prophylaxis counseling.
    AIDS PATIENT CARE and STDs 11/2014; DOI:10.1089/apc.2014.0154 · 3.58 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We investigated message comprehension and message framing preferences for communicating about PrEP efficacy with US MSM. We conducted eight focus groups (n = 38) and n = 56 individual interviews with MSM in Providence, RI. Facilitators probed comprehension, credibility, and acceptability of efficacy messages, including percentages, non-numerical paraphrases, efficacy ranges versus point estimates, and success- versus failure-framed messages. Our findings indicated a range of comprehension and operational understandings of efficacy messages. Participants tended to prefer percentage-based and success-framed messages, although preferences varied for communicating about efficacy using a single percentage versus a range. Participants reported uncertainty about how to interpret numerical estimates, and many questioned whether trial results would predict personal effectiveness. These results suggest that providers and researchers implementing PrEP may face challenges in communicating with users about efficacy. Efforts to educate MSM about PrEP should incorporate percentage-based information, and message framing decisions may influence message credibility and overall PrEP acceptability.
    AIDS and Behavior 05/2015; DOI:10.1007/s10461-015-1088-9 · 3.49 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In light of the 2 million HIV infections that occur globally each year, there is a need to optimize strategies that integrate biomedical and behavioral approaches to HIV prevention. Post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) immediately after acute high-risk exposures and pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) for those who engage in recurrent high-risk behaviors are promising bio-behavioral approaches to decreasing HIV transmission. Guidelines have recommended PEP for occupational and non-occupational exposures for over 15 years, but uptake of PEP has been limited, partly as a result of insufficient awareness of this intervention among persons at highest risk for acquiring HIV. However, since the publication of large randomized clinical trials demonstrating the efficacy of PrEP, and the dissemination of guidelines endorsing its use, there is a renewed focus on bio-behavioral prevention. Numerous studies have recently assessed the acceptability of bio-behavioral prevention programs among diverse populations or described experiences implementing these programs in "real-world" settings. As research and clinical data informing optimal utilization of PEP and PrEP are rapidly accumulating, this review provides a timely summary of recent progress in bio-behavioral prevention. By contextualizing the most noteworthy recent findings regarding PEP and PrEP, this review seeks to inform the successful implementation of these promising prevention approaches.
    Current HIV/AIDS Reports 01/2015; 12(1). DOI:10.1007/s11904-014-0253-5