Background Safety data about rilpivirine use during pregnancy remain scarce, and rilpivirine plasma concentrations are reduced during second/third trimesters, with a potential risk of viral breakthroughs. Thus, French guidelines recommend switching to rilpivirine-free combinations (RFCs) during pregnancy. Objectives To describe the characteristics of women initiating pregnancy while on rilpivirine and to compare the outcomes for virologically suppressed subjects continuing rilpivirine until delivery versus switching to an RFC. Methods In the ANRS-EPF French Perinatal cohort, we included women on rilpivirine at conception in 2010–18. Pregnancy outcomes were compared between patients continuing versus interrupting rilpivirine. In women with documented viral suppression (<50 copies/mL) before 14 weeks of gestation (WG) while on rilpivirine, we compared the probability of viral rebound (≥50 copies/mL) during pregnancy between subjects continuing rilpivirine versus those switching to RFC. Results Among 247 women included, 88.7% had viral suppression at the beginning of pregnancy. Overall, 184 women (74.5%) switched to an RFC (mostly PI/ritonavir-based regimens) at a median gestational age of 8.0 WG. Plasma HIV-1 RNA nearest delivery was <50 copies/mL in 95.6% of women. Among 69 women with documented viral suppression before 14 WG, the risk of viral rebound was higher when switching to RFCs than when continuing rilpivirine (20.0% versus 0.0%, P = 0.046). Delivery outcomes were similar between groups (overall birth defects, 3.8/100 live births; pregnancy losses, 2.0%; preterm deliveries, 10.6%). No HIV transmission occurred. Conclusions In virologically suppressed women initiating pregnancy, continuing rilpivirine was associated with better virological outcome than changing regimen. We did not observe a higher risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes.
Introduction The management of a pandemic, such as COVID-19, requires the full participation of citizens. This recent situation has revealed the undermining of user participation in the decision-making process. Thus, this study aims to assess the involvement of users in the design and administration of surveys for health crisis monitoring and to stimulate reflection on information processes shared upstream during the decision-making process. Methods A literature search was conducted on population monitoring surveys published during the first containment period in Belgium and France between April and May 2020. The selected studies were first analyzed according to a reading grid based on the criteria proposed by the World Health Organization (WHO) for monitoring populations and supplemented by data from a descriptive analysis of the selected studies. Second, with the objective of specifically evaluating the involvement of users in monitoring surveys, this study evaluated the surveys according to the following parameters: content of a study based on themes presented in surveys; inclusion of health literacy (HL); and factors of commitment of the respondents to the survey. Results A total of 45 studies were selected for final analysis. The majority of the surveys focused on the effect of COVID-19 on well-being. Furthermore, analysis indicated that, in summary, the HL of people concerned as well as the involvement of respondents is poorly considered, which remains limited in terms of the design and administration of the surveys. Discussion Although the principles of health democracy seemed to have been established, the exceptional regime induced by the epidemic overlooked the observance of such principles. This result indicates the need to reconsider the participation of citizens as real partners in care, including health crisis management.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.