PrEP Knowledge and Attitudes Among Adults Attending Public Health Clinics in Southern Arizona.

HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is underutilized among Hispanics, women, and low-income individuals. To better understand PrEP barriers in this population, questionnaires were administered to 500 patients attending public health clinics in southern Arizona which provide family planning and sexually transmitted infections care. Sixty-three percent believed that they had no risk of HIV infection. When asked "Before today, did you know that there was a pill that can prevent HIV infection?" 80% of persons answered no. Among women, 88% answered no to this question. As expected, individuals with a higher perceived HIV risk (OR 1.76) or one HIV risk factor (OR 5.85) had a higher probability of knowledge. Among survey participants 87% would take a daily pill, 91% would visit a health-care provider every 3 months, and 92% would have laboratory testing every 3 months. Fifty-four percent would not be afraid or embarrassed if friends or family knew they were taking PrEP. Seventy-two percent would take PrEP despite temporary nausea. Sixty-two percent would pay ≥ $40 every 3 months for PrEP. Lack of knowledge, rather than patient attitudes, is the more important barrier to wider utilization of PrEP among individuals, especially women, attending public health clinics in Southern Arizona. Future efforts need to focus on education and access to PrEP in underserved populations including women and Hispanics.

Efficacy of a five-minute compression-only cardiopulmonary resuscitation class compared to thirty-minute instruction among college students.

OBJECTIVE: To determine if 5-minute compression-only cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CCO-CPR) instruction is as effective as 30-minute instruction in improving participant knowledge and comfort with performing CCO-CPR as well as teaching CPR quality and responsiveness to an Out of Hospital Cardiac Arrest (OHCA). METHODS: A prospective randomized controlled trial of university undergraduates was performed. Participants were randomized to either a 5-minute (experimental) or 30-minute (control) CCO-CPR instruction class. Pre- and post-testing was performed with a written and simulation test. Measurements collected assessed rate and depth of compressions, time to call 911, and time to start chest compressions. Prior to instruction, subjects' baseline measurements of CPR performance were evaluated during a standardized sudden death scenario using a Laerdal SkillreporterTM mannequin. The written test and scenario were repeated after either the five or 30 â€‹minute CCO-CPR instruction using the same outcome measures. Statistical tests of association for categorical variables were assessed using the chi-square test and the independent samples t-test was utilized for continuous variables. All tests were two-sided and the level of significance was set at α â€‹= â€‹0.05. RESULTS: Among the 59 participants, 28 received 5 â€‹minutes of instruction and 31 received 30 â€‹minutes. Fifteen (25.4%) individuals reported prior CPR training. Post intervention, all measurements reached statistically significant improvements in each group but there was no difference between the two groups improvement in depth of compressions (experimental group: 41.8 â€‹mm, 95% CI 36.6-43.4 vs control group: 46.5 â€‹mm, 95% CI 40.9-48.3, p â€‹= â€‹0.06), compressions per minute (114.3 cpm, 95% CI 105.5-122.0 vs 121.1 cpm, 95% CI 115.1-131.4, p â€‹= â€‹0.10), time to starting chest compressions (13.5 vs 12.4 â€‹sec, p â€‹= â€‹0.45), or time to calling 911 (8.34 vs 7.65 â€‹sec, p â€‹= â€‹0.58). Further, there was a statistically significant improvement in participants that said they would probably or definitely perform CCO-CPR in real life after both interventions but no difference between the groups (100% of the experimental group and 93.5% of the control group p â€‹< â€‹0.49). CONCLUSION: Five-minute instruction is not inferior to 30-minute instruction at teaching undergraduate students how to perform quality bystander CCO-CPR.