RESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: Research suggests nonoccupational post exposure prophylaxis (nPEP) is under prescribed for people seeking treatment within 72 h of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) exposures in the emergency department (ED). This study is an assessment of ED prescribers' knowledge, attitudes and practices regarding administration of HIV nPEP. METHODS: This was an anonymous survey based on literature review and modified Delphi technique. We approached 153 ED participants at work over a 4-month period from 5 hospital-based and 2 freestanding EDs. There were 152 completed surveys: 80 attendings, 27 residents, and 44 physician assistants. RESULTS: The majority of those surveyed (133/149, 89.3%) believe it is their responsibility to provide HIV nPEP in the ED. Although 91% (138/151) and 87% (132/151) of participants are willing to prescribe nPEP for IV drug use and unprotected sex, respectively, only 40% (61/152) of participants felt they could confidently prescribe the appropriate regimen. Only 25% (37/151) of participants prescribed nPEP in the last year. Participants considered time (27%), connecting patients to follow-up (26%), and cost to patients (23%), as barriers to prescribing nPEP. CONCLUSIONS: This study identified perceived barriers to administration of nPEP and missed opportunities for HIV prevention in the ED. Although most ED prescribers were willing to prescribe nPEP and felt it is their responsibility to do so, the majority of prescribers were not confident in prescribing it. The most commonly cited barriers to prescribing nPEP were time and access to follow-up care.
Asunto(s)
Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital , Infecciones por VIH/prevención & control , Conocimientos, Actitudes y Práctica en Salud , Profilaxis Posexposición/métodos , Adulto , Técnica Delphi , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Encuestas y CuestionariosRESUMEN
Currently, the majority of new human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infections are transmitted by individuals with untreated HIV. In this retrospective study, we examined associations between demographic factors, viral suppression, acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS) status (CD4 count <200), and adherence to clinical follow-up in individuals living with HIV. Of the 489 patients, 135 (27.6%) were females, 235 (48.1%) were over 50 years old, 191 (39.1%) had Medicaid, Medicare, or Ryan White Insurance, 25 (5.1%) had CD4 counts below 200, and 207 (42.3%) were adherent to their clinic appointments. In univariable logistic regression analysis, age and viral load detectability were significantly associated with patient adherence to their clinic appointment. In multivariable analysis, only age remained significantly associated with clinic appointment adherence (Odds Ratio=2.1; 95% Confidence Interval=1.4, 3.1; P<0.001). Patients 50 years old or younger were half as likely to be adherent to their clinic appointments than patients over 50 years old. Gender and insurance status were not associated with viral suppression or AIDS status. The results illustrate the need for increased age-specific outreach to improve clinical adherence in younger individuals.