RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Daily and event-driven HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) with oral tenofovir-emtricitabine is highly effective to prevent HIV in men who have sex with men (MSM). PrEP care generally consists of in-clinic monitoring every 3 months that includes PrEP dispensing, counseling, and screening for HIV and sexually transmitted infections (STIs). However, the optimal frequency for monitoring remains undetermined. Attending a clinic every 3 months for monitoring may be a barrier for PrEP. Online-mediated PrEP care and reduced frequency of monitoring may lower this barrier. OBJECTIVE: The primary objective of this study is to establish the noninferiority of online PrEP care (vs in-clinic care) and monitoring every 6 months (vs every 3 months). The secondary objectives are to (1) examine differences between PrEP care modalities regarding incidences of STIs, HIV infection, and hepatitis C virus infection; retention in PrEP care; intracellular tenofovir-diphosphate concentration; and satisfaction, usability, and acceptability of PrEP care modalities; and (2) evaluate associations of these study outcomes with sociodemographic, behavioral, and psychological characteristics. METHODS: This study is a 2×2 factorial, 4-arm, open-label, multi-center, randomized, controlled, noninferiority trial. The 4 arms are (1) in-clinic monitoring every 3 months, (2) in-clinic monitoring every 6 months, (3) online monitoring every 3 months, and (4) online monitoring every 6 months. The primary outcome is a condomless anal sex act with a casual partner not covered or insufficiently covered by PrEP (ie, "unprotected act") as a proxy for HIV infection risk. Eligible individuals are MSM, and transgender and gender diverse people aged ≥18 years who are eligible for PrEP care at 1 of 4 participating sexual health centers in the Netherlands. The required sample size is 442 participants, and the planned observation time is 24 months. All study participants will receive access to a smartphone app, which contains a diary. Participants are requested to complete the diary on a daily basis during the first 18 months of participation. Participants will complete questionnaires at baseline and 6, 12, 18, and 24 months. Dried blood spots will be collected at 6 and 12 months for assessment of intracellular tenofovir-diphosphate concentration. Incidence rates of unprotected acts will be compared between the online and in-clinic arms, and between the 6-month and 3-month arms. Noninferiority will be concluded if the upper limit of the 2-sided 97.5% CI of the incidence rate ratio is <1.8. RESULTS: The results of the main analysis are expected in 2024. CONCLUSIONS: This trial will demonstrate whether online PrEP care and monitoring every 6 months is noninferior to standard PrEP care in terms of PrEP adherence. If noninferiority is established, these modalities may lower barriers for initiating and continuing PrEP use and potentially reduce the systemic burden for PrEP providers. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05093036; https://tinyurl.com/28b8ndvj. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/51023.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: Diane Forsythe and other feminist scholars have long shown how system builders' tacit assumptions lead to the systematic erasure of certain users from the design process. In spite of this phenomena being known in the health informatics literature for decades, recent research shows how patient portals and electronic patients health records continue to reproduce health inequalities in Western societies. To better understand this discrepancy between scholarly awareness of such inequities and mainstream design, this study unravels the (conceptual) assumptions and practices of designers and others responsible for portal implementation in the Netherlands and how citizens living in vulnerable circumstances are included in this process. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted semistructured interviews (n = 24) and questionnaires (n = 14) with portal designers, health professionals, and policy advisors. RESULTS: In daily design practices, equity is seen as an "end-of-the-pipeline" concern. Respondents identify health care professionals rather than patients as their main users. If patients are included in the design, this generally entails patients in privileged positions. The needs of citizens living in vulnerable circumstances are not prioritized in design processes. Developers legitimize their focus with reference to the innovation-theoretical approach of the Diffusion of Innovations. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Although feminist scholars have developed important understandings of the exclusion of citizens living in vulnerable circumstances from portal design, other academic efforts have profoundly shaped daily practices of portal development. Diane Forsythe would likely have taken up this discrepancy as a challenge by finding ways to translate these insights into mainstream systems design.
