Barriers to COVID-19 Vaccines and Strategies to Improve Acceptability and Uptake.

The COVID-19 pandemic has had a significant impact on communities across the United States (US). Three vaccines have now been granted Emergency Use Authorization by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) for use in the US. However, barriers to vaccination exist, some of which are well documented in the literature, including lack of knowledge, fear, accessibility, mistrust in the healthcare system, and systemic and operational obstacles. Vaccine hesitancy in the US could potentially hinder all the efforts and resources being used to beat COVID-19, which has resulted in more than 594 000 deaths in the US per the CDC as of early June 2021. In order to overcome this pandemic, vaccine distribution and uptake is crucial. Pharmacists play a crucial role as healthcare providers as they can dismantle vaccine hesitancy and make an outstanding impact on the efforts to overcome this pandemic.

Evidence2Practice (E2P): Leveraging Implementation Science to Promote Careers in HIV Research Among Students From Historically Black Colleges and Universities.

BACKGROUND: The HIV research workforce is not representative of populations most affected by the epidemic. Innovative educational programs are needed to motivate diverse student populations to pursue careers in HIV research. METHODS: The Duke University Center for AIDS Research Evidence2Practice (E2P) program is a 3-day interactive workshop that introduces students from Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCU) to HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis, implementation science, and human-centered design. Participants develop 1-page action plans to increase awareness and uptake of pre-exposure prophylaxis on their campus. The program was evaluated using a partially mixed-method concurrent equal status study design with pre-program and post-program surveys and in-depth interviews. RESULTS: Among the 52 participating students, 44 completed the preworkshop survey, 45 completed the postworkshop survey, and 10 participated in an in-depth interview. Most participants identified as Black or African American and cisgender female. Participating in the E2P program was associated with: (1) an increase in median interest in pursuing a career in HIV research (P < 0.01) and (2) a decrease in median perceived difficulty in starting a career in HIV research (P < 0.01). Several students described that a lack of knowledge about initiating an HIV research career, a perceived lack of qualifications and knowledge about HIV science, and limited experience were major barriers to considering careers in HIV research. CONCLUSIONS: The E2P program enhanced HBCU students' interest in careers related to HIV research and improved their self-efficacy to pursue such careers. On-campus educational enrichment initiatives, led by active HIV researchers and clinicians, should be a critical part of diversifying the HIV workforce.

Clinical Outcomes Following the Use of Archived Proviral HIV-1 DNA Genotype to Guide Antiretroviral Therapy Adjustment.

BACKGROUND: Evidence regarding the safety of using proviral HIV-1 DNA genotype (DNA GT) to guide antiretroviral therapy (ART) is limited. We hypothesized that HIV RNA would not increase following ART adjustment guided by DNA GT in a university HIV clinic. METHODS: Data were obtained from electronic medical records of adult persons living with HIV-1 (PWH) who underwent DNA GT testing and changed ART between October 2014 and November 2017. Logistic regression was used to evaluate the effect of ART switch on HIV RNA over time. RESULTS: Eighty-three PWH had DNA GT performed, 66 (80%) switched ART, and 59 had postswitch follow-up. Data were analyzed pre-/postswitch for these 59 PWH (median age, 54 years; 71% LWH ≥10 years; 46% ≥2 previous regimens; 36% recent low-level viremia; 34% unknown medication history). On DNA GT, 58% had ≥1-class ART resistance, 34% ≥2-class, and 10% 3-class. Median follow-up (range) was 337 (34-647) days. There was no change in probability of HIV RNA ≥50 copies/mL over time (P > .05). At baseline, 76% had HIV RNA <50 vs 88% at last postswitch follow-up (P = .092). Protease inhibitor use decreased from 58% to 24% (P < .001). Average daily pills and dosing frequency decreased from 3.48 to 2.05 (P < .001) and 1.39 to 1.09 (P < .001), respectively; ART cost did not change. CONCLUSIONS: DNA GT facilitated changes in ART in a treatment-experienced population without increases in HIV RNA. Decreased pill burden occurred without increased ART cost. Further studies to identify optimal use of DNA GT are needed.

Evaluation of the appropriateness of imipenem/cilastatin prescription and dosing in a tertiary care hospital.

BACKGROUND: Imipenem/cilastatin is an antibacterial agent of the carbapenem class of ß-lactams that is known to have an extremely wide spectrum of activity against Gram-positive, Gram-negative, aerobic, anaerobic, and even multidrug-resistant strains. The objective of this study was to evaluate the appropriate use of imipenem/cilastatin in a local tertiary care hospital. The study assessed the indication both empirically and after the culture results were available, the dose and dose adjustment in renal failure, as well as the incidence of seizure in hospitalized patients receiving imipenem/cilastatin. METHODS: This observational study was conducted in a tertiary care hospital over a 3-month period. The treatment of 100 patients with imipenem/cilastatin was evaluated both empirically and after culture results were available. Analysis of the appropriateness of imipenem/cilastatin indication, dose, and monitoring of seizure frequency was based on the package insert, updated published guidelines, and clinical judgment. RESULTS: Patients from internal medicine and intensive care units comprised approximately 50% of the population in the study. The patients received imipenem/cilastatin mainly for urinary tract infections (27%) or for sepsis of an unknown focus (22%). The use of imipenem/cilastatin empirically was appropriate in 97.2% (n=69/71) of the cases, and its use postculture in 86% of the cases. There were 29% of the patients who were not started on imipenem/cilastatin empirically. Four patients out of the 29 patients (13.8%) who were not started on imipenem/cilastatin empirically inappropriately received imipenem/cilastatin post-culture results. Thirty-three patients (33%) were not dosed appropriately, 30 of whom had renal impairment and creatinine clearance fluctuations. Only one patient developed a seizure while on imipenem/cilastatin. CONCLUSION: The prescription of imipenem/cilastatin at our setting was mostly appropriate to what is recommended in the guidelines and the literature, although a few cases could have been managed better. Dosage adjustment, however, was not as appropriate, mainly in patients who did not have a stable creatinine clearance.