Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) among people who use drugs: a qualitative scoping review of implementation determinants and change methods.

Implementation of pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) to prevent HIV transmission is suboptimal in the United States, particularly among people who use drugs (PWUD). PrEP research among PWUD is scarce, and the factors that impact implementation are largely unknown. Therefore, we conducted a scoping review of implementation determinants (i.e., barriers and facilitators), as well as the change methods (implementation strategies and adjunctive interventions) that have been evaluated to increase PrEP implementation and use among PWUD. We identified 32 peer-reviewed articles assessing determinants and five that evaluated change methods. Determinants were coded using the updated Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), which is an established framework to understand the multilevel barriers and facilitators associated with implementation. Findings indicate that most research was conducted among PrEP recipients (i.e., patients), focusing on awareness and willingness to use PrEP, with less focus on factors impacting clinicians and service delivery systems. Moreover, very few change methods have been evaluated to improve clinician adoption and adherence to CDC guidelines for PrEP provision and/or recipient uptake and adherence to PrEP. Future research is needed that focuses on factors impacting implementation from a clinician standpoint as well as innovative change methods to increase PrEP awareness, reach, adoption, and sustained adherence to guidelines. Implementation Science offers a wealth of knowledge to speed up the effort to end the HIV epidemic in the United States.

Improving Delivery and Use of HIV Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis in the US: A Systematic Review of Implementation Strategies and Adjunctive Interventions.

Implementation of pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) to prevent HIV transmission is suboptimal in the United States. To date, the literature has focused on identifying determinants of PrEP use, with a lesser focus on developing and testing change methods to improve PrEP implementation. Moreover, the change methods available for improving the uptake and sustained use of PrEP have not been systematically categorized. To summarize the state of the literature, we conducted a systematic review of the implementation strategies used to improve PrEP implementation among delivery systems and providers, as well as the adjunctive interventions used to improve the uptake and persistent adherence to PrEP among patients. Between November 2020 and January 2021, we searched Ovid MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Web of Science for peer reviewed articles. We identified 44 change methods (18 implementation strategies and 26 adjunctive interventions) across a variety of clinical and community-based service settings. We coded implementation strategies and adjunctive interventions in accordance with established taxonomies and reporting guidelines. Most studies focused on improving patient adherence to PrEP and most conducted pilot trials. Just over one-third of included studies demonstrated a positive effect on outcomes. In order to end the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) epidemic in the U.S., future, large scale HIV prevention research is needed that develops and evaluates implementation strategies and adjunctive interventions for target populations disproportionately affected by HIV.

Establishing Evidence Criteria for Implementation Strategies: A Delphi Study for HIV Services.

Background: There are no criteria specifically for evaluating the quality of implementation research and recommend implementation strategies likely to have impact to practitioners. We describe the development and application of the Best Practices Rubric, a set of criteria to evaluate the evidence supporting implementation strategies, in the context of HIV. Methods: We developed the Best Practices Rubric from 2022-2023 in three phases. (1) We purposively selected and recruited by email participants representing a mix of expertise in HIV service delivery, quality improvement, and implementation science. We developed a draft rubric and criteria based on a literature review and key informant interviews. (2) The rubric was then informed and revised through two e-Delphi rounds using a survey delivered online through Qualtrics. The first and second round Delphi surveys consisted of 71 and 52 open and close-ended questions, respectively, asking participants to evaluate, confirm, and make suggestions on different aspects of the rubric. After each survey round, data were analyzed and synthesized as appropriate, and the rubric and criteria were revised. (3) We then applied the rubric to a set of research studies assessing 18 implementation strategies designed to promote the adoption and uptake of pre-exposure prophylaxis, an HIV prevention medication, to assess reliable application of the rubric and criteria. Results: Our initial literature review yielded existing rubrics and criteria for evaluating intervention-level evidence. For a strategy-level rubric, additions emerged from interviews, for example, a need to consider the context and specification of strategies. Revisions were made after both Delphi rounds resulting in the confirmation of five evaluation domains - research design, implementation outcomes, limitations and rigor, strategy specification, and equity - and four evidence levels - best practice, promising practice, more evidence needed, and harmful practices. For most domains, criteria were specified at each evidence level. After an initial pilot round to develop an application process and provide training, we achieved 98% reliability when applying the criteria to 18 implementation strategies. Conclusions: We developed a rubric to evaluate the evidence supporting implementation strategies for HIV services. Although the rubric is specific to HIV, this tool is adaptable for evaluating strategies in other health areas.

A Systematic Review of Implementation Research on Determinants and Strategies of Effective HIV Interventions for Men Who Have Sex with Men in the United States.

Men who have sex with men (MSM) are disproportionately affected by HIV, accounting for two-thirds of HIV cases in the United States despite representing ∼5% of the adult population. Delivery and use of existing and highly effective HIV prevention and treatment strategies remain suboptimal among MSM. To summarize the state of the science, we systematically review implementation determinants and strategies of HIV-related health interventions using implementation science frameworks. Research on implementation barriers has focused predominantly on characteristics of individual recipients (e.g., ethnicity, age, drug use) and less so on deliverers (e.g., nurses, physicians), with little focus on system-level factors. Similarly, most strategies target recipients to influence their uptake and adherence, rather than improving and supporting implementation systems. HIV implementation research is burgeoning; future research is needed to broaden the examination of barriers at the provider and system levels, as well as expand knowledge on how to match strategies to barriers-particularly to address stigma. Collaboration and coordination among federal, state, and local public health agencies; community-based organizations; health care providers; and scientists are important for successful implementation of HIV-related health innovations.

Implementation determinants of HIV Self-Testing among young sexual minority men.

BACKGROUND: HIV self-testing (HIVST) has shown the potential for reaching people with heightened vulnerability to HIV, including young sexual minority men (YSMM), yet implementation of HIVST among YSMM aged 17-24 is scarce as a prevention method. Moreover, despite the consistent finding that offering HIVST increases HIV testing rates, barriers remain that need to be reduced in order to maximize the potential of this biomedical technology. Such information is necessary to direct implementation efforts to increase HIVST among YSMM, including HIV counseling and linkage to care. The current study was therefore intended to investigate perspectives for HIVST among YSMM and how HIVST can be marketed to increase implementation. METHODS: Between March and September 2020, we enrolled 41 YSMM to participate in one of nine online synchronous focus group discussions about their general experience with HIV preventive services. Guided by the Consolidated Framework (CFIR) for Implementation Research, we explored YSMM perspectives on facilitators and barriers to HIVST implementation. Data were analyzed using a deductive thematic content analysis approach. RESULTS: Many participants had never used HIVST before their participation in this study (n = 30; 73.2%). Qualitative results exhibited a variety of implementation determinants across the five CFIR 2.0 domains. Barriers included concerns about the format in which the testing materials would be provided (i.e., nature of packaging) and about the method in which the sample would need to be collected, particularly for those who had the testing kit mailed to their home address. These reservations were nested in the fear of unwanted disclosure of their sexual behavior, namely among the respondents who had to cohabitate with family due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Participants also discussed the limited local resources for HIVST. Many participants suggested programs that could be implemented to support HIVST, such as collaborations with trusted community agencies. CONCLUSIONS: Understanding YSMM' perspectives of HIVST may help identify implementation deficiencies within the delivery system and aid the development of implementation strategies to promote reach of HIVST.

Identification of Determinants and Implementation Strategies to Increase Long-Acting Injectable PrEP for HIV Prevention Among Latino Men Who Have Sex with Men (MSM).

BACKGROUND: Latino men who have sex with men (LMSM) are disproportionally affected by HIV infections in the USA. The uptake rate of pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) for HIV prevention has remained low among LMSM. Long-acting injectable PrEP (LAI-PrEP) may have the potential to improve structural, behavioral, and cognitive barriers to adherence. Given the potential benefits of LAI-PrEP and the limited data with this population, the aim of our study was to explore experiences and attitudes of LAI-PrEP among LMSM and identify implementation barriers compared to the standard oral presentation, align proposed implementation strategies, and propose outcomes to monitor and assess impact. METHODS: In this qualitative study, guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, we explored health care providers perspectives on facilitators and barriers to LAI-PrEP implementation strategies for LMSM. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using thematic content analysis. RESULTS: Fear of immigration policies, ability to conceal PrEP medication, health insurance coverage, health information fatigue, lack of culturally adapted information, and provider's lack of knowledge were among the main barriers to LAI-PrEP. Most providers discussed the need for adapted and/or tailored training materials for and suggested designing marketing materials and specific clinical recommendations for LAI-PrEP. CONCLUSION: In order to ensure an effective adaptation process that encompasses local and national goals of HIV prevention, future interventions should be designed in a way that incorporates culturally relevant information for LMSM. This study provides an implementation research logic model to guide future studies.

Categorising implementation determinants and strategies within the US HIV implementation literature: a systematic review protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Despite decreased rates of new infections, HIV/AIDS continues to impact certain US populations. In order to achieve the goals laid out in the Ending the HIV Epidemic (EHE) in the US initiative, implementation science is needed to expand the sustained use of effective prevention and treatment interventions, particularly among priority populations at risk for and living with HIV/AIDS. Over 200 HIV-related implementation studies have been funded by the US National Institutes of Health. Therefore, a comprehensive review of the literature identifying implementation determinants (barriers and facilitators) and categorising implementation strategies across the continuum of HIV prevention and care in the USA is appropriate and needed to enhance current knowledge and help achieve the goals laid out in the EHE national strategic plan. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This systematic review protocol follows the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Between November 2020 and January 2022, a broad database search strategy of Ovid MEDLINE, PsycINFO and Web of Science was conducted to capture implementation-related studies along the HIV prevention and care continuum. Articles were eligible for inclusion if they were: conducted in the USA, published after the year 2000, written in English, related to HIV/AIDS, focused on outcomes related to dissemination and implementation (ie, did not test/evaluate/explore implementation determinants or strategies) and were behavioural studies (ie, not basic science). We plan to conduct three systematic reviews to identify and categorise determinants and strategies associated with three HIV focus areas: pre-exposure prophylaxis, testing/diagnosing and linkage to care, and treatment. Determinants will be coded according to an adapted Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research 2.0. Implementation strategies and outcomes will be categorised in accordance with existing taxonomies and frameworks. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval is not applicable. No original data will be collected. Results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications, conference presentations and via online tools. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021233089.

Determinants of Pre-exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) Implementation in Transgender Populations: A Qualitative Scoping Review.

We conducted a scoping review of contextual factors impeding uptake and adherence to pre-exposure prophylaxis in transgender communities as an in-depth analysis of the transgender population within a previously published systematic review. Using a machine learning screening process, title and abstract screening, and full-text review, the initial systematic review identified 353 articles for analysis. These articles were peer-reviewed, implementation-related studies of PrEP in the U.S. published after 2000. Twenty-two articles were identified in this search as transgender related. An additional eleven articles were identified through citations of these twenty-two articles, resulting in thirty-three articles in the current analysis. These thirty-three articles were qualitatively coded in NVivo using adapted constructs from the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research as individual codes. Codes were thematically assessed. We point to barriers of implementing PrEP, including lack of intentional dissemination efforts and patience assistance, structural factors, including sex work, racism, and access to gender affirming health care, and lack of provider training. Finally, over 60% of articles lumped cisgender men who have sex with men with trans women. Such articles included sub-samples of transgender individuals that were not representative. We point to areas of growth for the field in this regard.

RESUMEN: En este revisión de alcance, examinamos los factores contextuales que impiden la adopción y el cumplimiento de la profilaxis previa a la exposición en las comunidades transgénero. Este revisión sistemática se formó a partir de una revisión sistemática más grande. Utilizando un proceso de selección de aprendizaje automático, filtración de los titulus y examines, y revision del texto complete, el primer revisión sistemática identificó 353 artículos por el analisis. Estes artículos fueron estudios revisados por pares, relacionados con la implementación de la PrEP en los EE.UU. publicados despues de 2000. Veintidós artículos se identificaron en esta b?squeda como relacionados con personas transgénero. Se identificaron once artículos adicionales a través de citas de estos veintidós artículos, lo que resultó en treinta y tres artículos en el análisis actual. Estos treinta y tres artículos fueron codificados cualitativamente en NVivo utilizando construcciones adaptadas del Marco Consolidado para la Investigación de Implementación (CFIR) como códigos individuales. Los códigos fueron evaluados temáticamente. Señalamos las barreras de la implementación de la PrEP, como la falta de esfuerzos intencionales de difusión y asistencia al paciente, las barreras estructurales como el trabajo sexual, el racism, y el acceso a la salud de afirmación de género, y la falta del entrenamiento de los doctores. Finalmente, más de sesenta por ciento de los artículos tuvieron submuestras de personas transgénero que no eran representativas. Se?alamos áreas de crecimiento para el campo en este sentido.

Minority Stress, Coping, and Transgender Youth in Schools-Results from the Resilience and Transgender Youth Study.

BACKGROUND: Transgender youth report high rates of negative experiences in schools. Using a lens of minority stress, this study sought to examine in-school experiences of transgender youth to understand youth coping and to identify key opportunities for improving school environments for transgender youth. METHODS: Participants included 41 youth across 33 in-depth interviews (Mage  = 21.7) and two focus groups (N = 8; Mage  = 17.3). Thematic analysis was used to analyze data. Themes related to stress, coping, and facilitators/barriers to stress/coping were derived and coded. RESULTS: Distal stressors, such as structural discrimination and prejudice events, were found to contribute to the exclusion of transgender youth from school life, while proximal stressors, such as concealment and expectations of rejection, reinforced transgender youth's feelings of personal isolation. Participants expressed coping with both challenges by advocating for inclusion through direct action with teachers and administrators and seeking/finding connection with trusted staff and peers. CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest that creating safe and supportive environments at school for transgender youth is an attainable goal, as all identified barriers to inclusivity and connection were modifiable. By considering the needs of transgender youth in policies and programming, schools may improve climate for and wellbeing of transgender students.