Background: HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) reduces incident HIV infections, but efficacy depends on adherence and retention, among other factors. Substance use disorders, unmet mental health needs, and demographic factors are associated with nonadherence in HIV-infected patients; we studied whether these affect PrEP retention in care. Methods: To investigate potential risk factors disengagement in a comprehensive HIV prevention program, we conducted a retrospective cohort analysis of individuals starting tenofovir–emtricitabine between January 1, 2015, and November 30, 2017. The primary outcome was adherence to the initial 3-visit schedule after PrEP initiation. Results: The cohort was predominantly African American (23%) and Hispanic (46%). Race, ethnicity, substance use, patient health questionnaire 9 score, insurance, and housing status were not associated with retention at the third follow-up visit. Age <30, PrEP initiation in 2017, PrEP initiation in the sexual health clinic, and PrEP same-day start were associated with lower retention; male gender at birth, transition from post‐exposure prophylaxis (PEP) to PrEP, feeling that they could benefit from, or participating in mental health services were associated with increased retention. Overall, retention in HIV preventative care at the first follow-up visit (68%) and third follow-up visit (35%) after PrEP initiation was low. Conclusion: Clinic services and ancillary services (such as mental health) may facilitate retention in care. In this study, select social and behavioral determinants of health were not found to be linked to retention. Focused investigation of reasons for dropout may elucidate the challenges to maintaining individuals in PrEP care and direct resource allocation to those in greatest need.

Background Ending the HIV epidemic requires linkage of at-risk individuals from diverse health care settings to comprehensive HIV prevention services. Sexually transmitted infections (STIs) are significant biomarkers of HIV risk and should trigger preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) discussion. We reviewed STI testing practices outside of sexual health clinics to identify opportunities for improvement in the provision of HIV prevention services. Methods An electronic sexual health dashboard was used to identify patient encounters with a positive gonorrhea, chlamydia, and/or rapid plasma reagin test result between January 1, 2019, and August 23, 2019, at a large urban academic medical center. A retrospective chart review was performed to assess HIV testing, completeness of STI screening, and HIV prevention discussion; inadequate screening was defined as no HIV test in 12 months before STI diagnosis. Results A total of 815 patients with 856 patient encounters were included. Patients were predominantly female (64.4%); median age was 24 years (range, 18–85 years). The most common test and most common positive test result was the genitourinary gonorrhea/chlamydia nucleic acid amplification test. Multisite testing was rare (7.5% of patient encounters) and performed more frequently in men than in women (20.3% vs. 0.36%). Women were also more likely to be inadequately screened for HIV (15.1% vs. 25.8%). Documentation of PrEP discussion was rare (4.7% of patient encounters) compared with safe sex (44.6%) and condoms (49.8%). Preexposure prophylaxis was discussed almost exclusively with men compared with women (17% vs. 1.1%). Conclusions In patients diagnosed with bacterial STI outside of sexual health clinics, gaps in HIV prevention exist. HIV screening, multisite STI screening, and discussion of PrEP were particularly infrequent among women.

Even though over the last 25 years, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommendations for HIV screening have expanded to encompass population-wide screening in all healthcare settings, and despite the availability of pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP), a large proportion of individuals at risk of infection are not linked to prevention care. We evaluated missed opportunities for HIV screening and linkage to PrEP from 2006 through 2017 at an urban academic medical center serving a predominantly minority community. A missed opportunity for HIV screening was a provider visit that did not include HIV testing and occurred within the 12 months before the first positive HIV test. A missed opportunity for prevention was a visit after 2012 that included a negative HIV test, no evaluation for PrEP, and was followed by a positive HIV test. Univariate analysis was performed to assess characteristics of individuals with missed opportunities for screening and prevention services. Between 2006 and 2017, 721 patients were newly diagnosed with HIV. Two hundred forty-seven diagnoses were made in the early period (2006)(2007)(2008)(2009)(2010), 236 in the middle period (2010)(2011)(2012)(2013), and 238 in the late period (2014)(2015)(2016)(2017). Overall 60% of patients had at least one missed opportunity, 36% for HIV screening, and 42% for PrEP. There was no improvement in the rates of individuals with a missed opportunity for HIV screening over time. Ending the HIV epidemic will require concerted efforts to bolster access to testing and ensure that all individuals are offered screening, counseling, and linkage to prevention and care services.

In December 2017, our academic medical center implemented universal hepatitis C virus screening among adult hospitalized patients. We reviewed charts of patients screening positive outside the birth cohort (1945–1965) in the first 6 months after implementation. Documented risk factors were common in younger patients but rare in patients born before 1945.