Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
1.
PLoS One ; 13(7): e0200338, 2018.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30044820

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: The United States Public Health Service released clinical practice guidelines for daily oral preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) in May 2014. Local health departments (LHDs) are expected to play a critical role in PrEP implementation. We surveyed LHDs to assess awareness of and interest in supporting PrEP implementation, what roles they were taking, or believed they should take, in supporting PrEP, and what resources would be required to do so. METHODS: LHDs were surveyed in 2015 to assess their engagement in PrEP implementation (n = 500). The study employed a cross-sectional survey design with a randomly selected stratified sample. RESULTS: Among responding LHDs (n = 284), 109 (29%, weighted proportion) reported engagement in PrEP implementation. LHDs serving large jurisdictions (population 500,000+) and located in the West were more likely to be engaged in PrEP implementation. Making referrals for PrEP (74%) and conducting education and outreach to community members (51%) were the activities most frequently reported by LHDs engaged in PrEP implementation; 45% anticipated expanding their level of engagement. Among LHDs not engaged in PrEP implementation, 13% expected to become engaged over the next four years, 46% were undecided, and 41% reported it was unlikely. Information about PrEP for health care providers and information about PrEP for health department staff were the most frequently reported resource needs for LHDs engaged and not engaged in PrEP implementation, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: PrEP implementation by LHDs was limited in 2015, three years after Food and Drug Administration approval and one year after the U.S. Public Health Service issued clinical practice guidelines. PrEP is a recently available intervention that is requiring LHDs to adjust existing HIV prevention efforts and service delivery models. Additional resources and implementation research is needed to effectively support PrEP scale-up by LHDs. Efforts must also be undertaken to increase PrEP awareness, knowledge, and implementation capacity among LHDs.


Assuntos
Fármacos Anti-HIV/administração & dosagem , Infecções por HIV/prevenção & controle , Implementação de Plano de Saúde , Profilaxia Pré-Exposição , Administração Oral , Cidades , Estudos Transversais , Conhecimentos, Atitudes e Prática em Saúde , Recursos em Saúde , Governo Local , Profilaxia Pré-Exposição/métodos , Participação dos Interessados , Estados Unidos
2.
Sex Transm Dis ; 44(8): 505-509, 2017 08.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28703733

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: We examined the infrastructure for US public sexually transmitted disease (STD) clinical services. METHODS: In 2013 to 2014, we surveyed 331 of 1225 local health departments (LHDs) who either reported providing STD testing/treatment in the 2010 National Profile of Local Health Departments survey or were the 50 local areas with the highest STD cases or rates. The sample was stratified by jurisdiction population size. We examined the primary referral clinics for STDs, the services offered and the impact of budget cuts (limited to government funding only). Data were analyzed using SAS, and analyses were weighted for nonresponse. RESULTS: Twenty-two percent of LHDs cited a specialty STD clinic as their primary referral for STD services; this increased to 53.5% of LHDs when combination STD-family planning clinics were included. The majority of LHDs (62.8%) referred to clinics providing same-day services. Sexually transmitted disease clinics more frequently offered extragenital testing for chlamydia and/or gonorrhea (74.7%) and gonorrhea culture (68.5%) than other clinics (52.9%, 46.2%, respectively; P < 0.05). The majority of LHDs (61.5%) reported recent budget cuts. Of those with decreased budgets, the most common impacts were fewer clinic hours (42.8%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 24.4-61.2), reduced routine screening (40.2%; 95% CI, 21.7-58.8) and reductions in partner services (42.1%; 95% CI, 23.6-60.7). One quarter of those with reduced STD budgets increased fees or copays for clients. CONCLUSIONS: Findings demonstrate gaps and reductions in US public STD services including clinical services that play an important role in reducing disease transmission. Furthermore, STD clinics tended to offer more specialized STD services than other public clinics.


Assuntos
Atenção à Saúde , Serviços de Planejamento Familiar , Saúde Pública/economia , Infecções Sexualmente Transmissíveis/prevenção & controle , Orçamentos , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Encaminhamento e Consulta , Infecções Sexualmente Transmissíveis/economia , Inquéritos e Questionários , Estados Unidos
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA