Trends in HIV Postexposure Prophylaxis Prescription and Compliance After Sexual Exposure in Amsterdam, 2000–2004

Sonder, Gerard J.B.; Hoek, Anneke van den; Regez, R. M.; Brinkman, Kees; Prins, Jan M.; Mulder, Jan-Willem; Veenstra, J.; Claessen, F. A. P.; Coutinho, Roel A.

doi:10.1097/01.olq.0000237838.43716.ee

Cited by 41 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…[8][9][10][11][12] Findings from these studies suggest that some U.S. ED clinicians are unaware of or were not following Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidelines, are improvising their care in the absence of federal guidelines on nonoccupational HIV PEP, or are responding to other factors that influenced their choices about using HIV PEP. Researchers in countries other than the United States have also reported the initiation HIV PEP at EDs [13][14][15][16][17][18][19] and some found instances of inappropriate initiation of or missed opportunities for prescribing HIV PEP. [20][21][22] This study was designed to examine the factors that influence the initiation of HIV PEP in EDs at a state level in order to advise future guideline authors and emergency medicine educators on how HIV PEP is being prescribed and to identify any potential problems with its initiation in this setting.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Predictors of the Initiation of HIV Postexposure Prophylaxis in Rhode Island Emergency Departments

Merchant

Mayer

Becker

et al. 2008

AIDS Patient Care and STDs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The objective of this study was to elucidate factors that predicted the initiation of HIV postexposure prophylaxis (PEP) for blood or body fluid exposures evaluated at Rhode Island emergency departments (EDs). The study involved a retrospective review of patient visits to all civilian Rhode Island EDs for these exposures from 1995 to mid-2001. Multivariate logistic regression models were created to evaluate predictors of the offering and the acceptance and receipt of HIV PEP from 1996 to 2001. The search identified 3622 patients who sustained a blood or body fluid exposure. Of these, 43.8% were health care workers (HCWs) and 57.2% were not HCWs. Most (52.0%) of the exposures were nonsexual. HIV PEP was offered to 21.0% and accepted and received by 9.4% of all patients. HIV PEP was offered more often after significant exposures, exposures to known HIV-infected sources, when time elapsed after the exposure was shorter, if the patients were HCWs, adults, presented to a teaching hospital, presented during the latter years of the study, or sustained nonsexual exposures. Once offered HIV PEP, patients who were male, adult, sustained a significant exposure, knew the source was HIV infected, sustained a nonsexual exposure, or were HCWs had a greater odds of accepting and receiving HIV PEP. Even when controlling for exposure significance, HIV status, and time elapsed since the exposure, several factors such as gender and type of hospital that are unrelated to the exposure appeared to influence the initiation of HIV PEP. ED providers should ensure that these factors do not inappropriately restrict its initiation.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Predictors of the Initiation of HIV Postexposure Prophylaxis in Rhode Island Emergency Departments

Merchant

Mayer

Becker

et al. 2008

AIDS Patient Care and STDs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Estimates of repeat NPEP use vary from 8% over 5 years (Sonder et al 2007) to 28% over 24 months (Schechter et al 2004). In the San Francisco PEP Study, 17% of participants received at least one repeat course of NPEP within 1 year ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Determinants of High-Risk Sexual Behavior during Post-Exposure Prophylaxis to Prevent HIV Infection

et al. 2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Men who have sex with men (MSM) receiving non-occupational post-exposure prophylaxis (NPEP) to prevent HIV transmission completed interview-assisted questionnaires regarding high-risk behavior in the 6 months prior to NPEP and during the 28-day NPEP period. 21% of participants reported unprotected sex during NPEP, and 11% reported unprotected sex with HIV-positive or HIV status unknown partners. In univariate analyses, unprotected sex during NPEP was associated with prevention fatigue, depression, loss of loved ones to HIV, and a history of engagement with HIV/AIDS service organizations, e.g., receiving services from an HIV-related agency, donating money to HIV-related causes, and reading HIV-related magazines. Logistic regression analyses revealed that the strongest predictor of risk-taking during NPEP was HIV engagement. These data underscore the importance of combining chemoprophylaxis with behavioral interventions that support risk-reduction. Such interventions should not assume that those most engaged with HIV/AIDS service organizations are less likely to engage in risk behavior.

show abstract

“…Acceptance by 20-60% of patients offered nPEP was found in three additional single-site studies (Diniz, Almeida, Ribeiro, & Macedo, 2007;Reeves, Jawad, & Welch, 2004;Wiebe, Comay, McGregor, & Ducceschi, 2000). And acceptance greater than 80% was found in the remaining four studies; two conducted at single sites (Garcia et al, 2005;Limb, Kawsar, & Forster, 2002), one inclusive of city-wide data (Sonder et al, 2007), and one regional (Carrieri, Bendiane, Moatti, & Rey, 2006).…”

Section: Npep Acceptancementioning

confidence: 98%

“…Rates of nPEP acceptance for the remaining four US adult populations ranged from moderate (20-40%) in one state-wide, and one single-site study (Merchant et al, 2008;Myles, Hirozawa, Katz, Kimmerling, & Bamberger, 2000) to greater than 75% in two other single-site studies (Linden et al, 2005;Merchant et al, 2003). In the four studies concurrent to CDC (2005) guideline publication (see Table 5), Diniz et al (2007) 92 52 (57%) Garcia et al (2005) 278 169 (60%) Kerr et al (2003) 34 14 (41%) Limb et al (2002) 8 5 (63%) Reeves et al (2004) 31 3 (9%) Rey et al (2008) -53 (54%) Sonder et al (2007) 23 - Templeton et al (2005) 9 3 (30%) Wiebe et al (2000) 71 8 (11%) Studies with US populations conducted pre-CDC guidelines Linden et al (2005) 82 18 (22%) Merchant et al (2008) 35 - Merchant et al (2003) 34 - Moe and Grau (2001) 2 - Myles et al (2000) 69 26 (28%) Completed 1 week Pesola et al (1999) 2 - Straight and Heaton (2007) 846 -Note: xUnless otherwise noted. *Percentage reflects the number completing nPEP out of those who accepted nPEP.…”

Section: Npep Acceptancementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Nonoccupational postexposure prophylaxis following sexual assault in industrialized low-HIV-prevalence countries: A review

Draughon

Sheridan

2012

Psychology, Health & Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although available for over a decade, use of nonoccupational postexposure prophylaxis (nPEP) remains controversial in the United States. There are concerns over sexual assault survivors' adherence, or lack thereof, leading to increased costs without an appreciable decrease in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) transmission. This review examines and synthesizes the available literature from the past 10 years to determine the true rates of provision and adherence to nPEP regimens in sexual assault survivors in low HIV prevalence, industrialized nations. Findings suggest that further prospective research is necessary to better understand the process of post-assault nPEP evaluation and subsequent follow-up and adherence.

show abstract

Trends in HIV Postexposure Prophylaxis Prescription and Compliance After Sexual Exposure in Amsterdam, 2000–2004

Abstract: Despite a widely available PEP program in Amsterdam, the number of PEP requests remained low. Most people completed their PEP course; compliance with follow-up HIV testing was high.

Cited by 41 publications

References 17 publications

Predictors of the Initiation of HIV Postexposure Prophylaxis in Rhode Island Emergency Departments

Predictors of the Initiation of HIV Postexposure Prophylaxis in Rhode Island Emergency Departments

Determinants of High-Risk Sexual Behavior during Post-Exposure Prophylaxis to Prevent HIV Infection

Nonoccupational postexposure prophylaxis following sexual assault in industrialized low-HIV-prevalence countries: A review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About