"Let's Be a Person to Person and Have a Genuine Conversation": Comparing Perspectives on PrEP and Sexual Health Communication Between Black Sexual Minority Men and Healthcare Providers.

Patient-provider communication is a key factor affecting HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) awareness and access among Black sexual minority men (SMM). Optimizing patient-provider communication requires a deeper understanding of communication dynamics. In this study, we investigated the perspectives of both HIV-negative/status-unknown Black SMM and practicing community healthcare providers regarding patient-provider communication about PrEP and sexual health. We conducted eleven semi-structured qualitative focus groups (six with Black SMM; five with providers) in the Northeastern USA and thematically analyzed transcripts. A total of 36 Black SMM and 27 providers participated in the focus groups. Our analysis revealed points of alignment and divergence in the two groups' perspectives related to patient-provider communication. Points of alignment included: (1) the importance ascribed to maximizing patients' comfort and (2) belief in patients' right to non-discriminatory healthcare. Points of divergence included: (1) Black SMM's preference for sexual privacy versus providers' preference that patients share sexual information, (2) Black SMM's perception that providers have an ethical responsibility to initiate conversations about PrEP with patients versus providers' perception of such conversations as being optional, and (3) Black SMM's preference for personalized sexual health conversations versus providers' preference for standardized conversations. Findings underscore a need for providers to offer more patient-centered sexual healthcare to Black SMM, which should entail routinely presenting all prevention options available-including PrEP-and inviting open dialogue about sex, while also respecting patients' preferences for privacy about their sexuality. This approach could increase PrEP access and improve equity in the US healthcare system.

The impact of broadening COVID-19 testing eligibility on communities of color - A lesson for overcoming structural barriers to health care.

CDC guidelines for COVID-19 testing in March 2020 did not prioritize underserved communities. We present the effect that expanding COVID-19 testing had for residents of the predominantly Hispanic city of Chelsea, MA, which had the highest case rate in the state. Results were compared to another city with similar demographics, Lynn, MA, where testing eligibility remained unchanged. Institutional data were used to identify outpatient visits for influenza-like illness or COVID-19 exposure, COVID-19 tests, and hospitalizations for confirmed COVID-19 between 3/30/2020-4/28/2020. Multivariable logistic regressions were used to compare outcomes before and after the change in testing eligibility occurred on 4/13/2020. A total of 3,060 patients were included, 1,374 Chelsea residents and 1,686 Lynn residents. After guidelines changed, Chelsea residents were more likely to present as outpatients (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 4.2, p < 0.001) and less likely to be hospitalized (AOR 0.2, p < 0.001). They were more likely to be tested (AOR 8.8, p < 0.001), but less likely to test positive (AOR 0.6, p = 0.05). Lynn residents were also more likely to be tested after 4/13/2020 (AOR 1.9, p < 0.001), but no significant differences in visit acuity or test positivity were observed. This study demonstrates how broadening testing eligibility for one highly affected, predominantly Hispanic community was associated with an increase in outpatient presentations and a concomitant decrease in test positivity and hospitalizations. These results highlight the impact of improved access to care on utilization of services among underserved communities, a lesson that is especially crucial as we continue to grapple with the COVID pandemic.

Addressing virtual care disparities for patients with limited English proficiency.

During a surge of COVID-19 cases, the majority of care delivery at a large academic medical center moved to virtual care. Due to COVID-19-associated regulatory changes, virtual care is now delivered through telephone and videoconferencing platforms. Although virtual platforms allow patients to access care while socially distancing, patients with limited English proficiency (LEP) face structural barriers to these platforms, including lack of access to technology, need for medical interpreters, unfriendly patient portals, and increased privacy concerns. Strategies for increasing access to virtual platforms and technology for patients with LEP included offering patient education in multiple languages, reducing barriers to patient portal enrollment, and addressing the technology literacy gap through the use of tablets and bilingual interns. Strategies for addressing privacy concerns for patients with LEP included developing a low-literacy script and other actions that address patient concerns about Immigration and Customs Enforcement and mitigate perceived risk, as well as identifying a virtual platform that meets privacy regulations and does not require a patient to download an application to their phone or computer to join. Strategies for integrating medical interpreters into virtual visits included assessing existing virtual platforms for the ability to host a third party, changing the electronic health record software (Epic) interface, and convening directors of interpreter departments at each site to ensure comprehensive system rollout. Health care organizations that rely heavily on virtual visits to provide patient care will need to take all these challenges into consideration for patients with LEP.

Optimizing Provider Preexposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) Training: A Cross-Sectional Analysis of Recommendations from Providers Across the PrEP Implementation Cascade.

Expanding PrEP access necessitates training that supports healthcare providers' progression along the PrEP implementation cascade, moving from PrEP awareness to prescription. We surveyed 359 USA providers about PrEP training content and format recommendations. We examined the association between cascade location and training recommendations. Most providers were aware of PrEP (100%), willing to prescribe PrEP (97.2%), had discussed PrEP with patients (92.2%), and had prescribed PrEP (79.9%). Latent class regression analysis revealed that cascade location was associated with training recommendations. Although all providers recommended PrEP-specific content (e.g., patient eligibility), providers who were located further along the cascade also recommended more comprehensive content, including sexual history-taking and sexual and gender minority competence training. Providers further along the cascade were also more likely to recommend interactive training formats (e.g., role-playing). These insights from providers furthest along the cascade indicate the importance of including comprehensive content and interactive formats in future PrEP training initiatives.

The role of race, ethnicity, and language in care transitions.

OBJECTIVES: To identify areas where transition from hospital to community could be improved, with a special focus on racial, ethnic, and language differences. STUDY DESIGN: A cross-sectional survey administered by postal mail and bilingual telephone interviewers. METHODS: Patients were randomly selected within strata by race, ethnicity, and language proficiency. A total of 224 patients (response rate: 63.5%) who had recently experienced a hospital stay completed the survey. RESULTS: Overall, 1 in 4 patients were alone at discharge. More than half of patients with limited English proficiency reported lack of access to medical interpreters and translated materials. We noted significant differences by race, ethnicity, and language in technology access and in patient-reported worries in the posthospital period. Hispanic or Latino patients and patients with limited English proficiency were less likely to report access to a computer and less likely to access the Patient Gateway portal. Black or African American patients were also less likely to use the Patient Gateway portal. Asian patients were more likely to be worried about getting home health services. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings highlight the enhanced difficulties that diverse patients may experience when transitioning from hospital to community-based settings. When considering how to best address the complex needs of diverse populations, interventions must be sensitive to the presence or absence of others, potential digital divides, and medical interpretation.

Differences in the use of telephone and video telemedicine visits during the COVID-19 pandemic.

OBJECTIVES: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic forced health systems to offer video and telephone visits as in-person visit alternatives. Although video visits offer some benefits compared with telephone visits, they require complex setup, which may disadvantage some patients due to the "digital divide." Our objective was to determine patient and neighborhood characteristics associated with visit modality. STUDY DESIGN: This was a cross-sectional study across 1652 primary care and specialty care practices of adult patients at an integrated health system from April 23 to June 1, 2020. METHODS: We used electronic health record and administrative data. Our primary outcome was visit modality (in-person, video, or telephone), which was captured using billing codes. We assessed predictors of using video vs telephone using multivariable logistic regression. We used hierarchical logistic regression to determine the contribution of patient-, physician-, and practice-level components of variance in the choice of video or telephone visits. RESULTS: We analyzed 231,596 visits by 162,102 patients. Sixty-five percent of the visits were virtual (31.7% telephone, 33.5% video). Patients who were older than 65 years (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 0.41; 95% CI, 0.40-0.43), Black (AOR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.57-0.63), Hispanic (AOR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.73-0.80), Spanish-speaking (AOR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.52-0.61), and from areas with low broadband access (AOR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.88-0.98) were less likely to use video visits. Practices (38%) and clinicians (26%) drove more of the variation in video visit use than patients (9%). CONCLUSIONS: Telemedicine access differences may compound disparities in chronic disease and COVID-19 outcomes. Institutions should monitor video visit use across demographics and equip patients, clinicians, and practices to promote telemedicine equity.

High Seroprevalence of Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Antibodies in Chelsea, Massachusetts.

SARS-CoV-2 antibody testing allows quantitative determination of disease prevalence, which is especially important in high-risk communities. We performed anonymized convenience sampling of 200 currently asymptomatic residents of Chelsea, the epicenter of COVID-19 illness in Massachusetts, by BioMedomics SARS-CoV-2 combined IgM-IgG point-of-care lateral flow immunoassay. The seroprevalence was 31.5% (17.5% IgM+IgG+, 9.0% IgM+IgG-, and 5.0% IgM-IgG+). Of the 200 participants, 50.5% reported no symptoms in the preceding 4 weeks, of which 24.8% (25/101) were seropositive, and 60% of these were IgM+IgG-. These data are the highest seroprevalence rates observed to date and highlight the significant burden of asymptomatic infection.

The Business Case for Mental Health Equity.

More than 47 million Americans experience mental illness each year, and more than 9.2 million suffer from mental health and substance use disorders. More than 60% of adults with mental illness and 81% of those with substance use disorders do not receive treatment. As the human and financial costs from our nation's mental health and substance use disorders crisis escalate, a strong business case to better address this crisis has emerged. This article describes the root causes and cost of disparities and offers an innovative perspective on aligning stakeholders to make the business case for equity in treatment and outcomes.

Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Disease Severity on Admission Chest Radiographs among Patients Admitted with Confirmed Coronavirus Disease 2019: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

Background Disease severity on chest radiographs has been associated with higher risk of disease progression and adverse outcomes from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Few studies have evaluated COVID-19-related racial and/or ethnic disparities in radiology. Purpose To evaluate whether non-White minority patients hospitalized with confirmed COVID-19 infection presented with increased severity on admission chest radiographs compared with White or non-Hispanic patients. Materials and Methods This single-institution retrospective cohort study was approved by the institutional review board. Patients hospitalized with confirmed COVID-19 infection between March 17, 2020, and April 10, 2020, were identified by using the electronic medical record (n = 326; mean age, 59 years ±17 [standard deviation]; male-to-female ratio: 188:138). The primary outcome was the severity of lung disease on admission chest radiographs, measured by using the modified Radiographic Assessment of Lung Edema (mRALE) score. The secondary outcome was a composite adverse clinical outcome of intubation, intensive care unit admission, or death. The primary exposure was the racial and/or ethnic category: White or non-Hispanic versus non-White (ie, Hispanic, Black, Asian, or other). Multivariable linear regression analyses were performed to evaluate the association between mRALE scores and race and/or ethnicity. Results Non-White patients had significantly higher mRALE scores (median score, 6.1; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 5.4, 6.7) compared with White or non-Hispanic patients (median score, 4.2; 95% CI: 3.6, 4.9) (unadjusted average difference, 1.8; 95% CI: 0.9, 2.8; P < .01). For both White (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.3; 95% CI: 1.2, 1.4; P < .001) and non-White (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.2; 95% CI: 1.1, 1.3; P < .001) patients, increasing mRALE scores were associated with a higher likelihood of experiencing composite adverse outcome with no evidence of interaction (P = .16). Multivariable linear regression analyses demonstrated that non-White patients presented with higher mRALE scores at admission chest radiography compared with White or non-Hispanic patients (adjusted average difference, 1.6; 95% CI: 0.5, 2.7; P < .01). Adjustment for hypothesized mediators revealed that the association between race and/or ethnicity and mRALE scores was mediated by limited English proficiency (P < .01). Conclusion Non-White patients hospitalized with coronavirus disease 2019 infection were more likely to have a higher severity of disease on admission chest radiographs than White or non-Hispanic patients, and increased severity was associated with worse outcomes for all patients. © RSNA, 2020 Online supplemental material is available for this article.

Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Radiology: A Call to Action.

The US health care system is in the midst of incredible transformation. High-value, high-quality health care is the ultimate goal. Guided by the Institute of Medicine report "Crossing the Quality Chasm," the focus is to deliver care that is safe, efficient, effective, timely, patient centered, and equitable. Equity is the principle that quality of care should not vary based on patient characteristics, such as race or ethnicity. Even with the same insurance and socioeconomic status and when comorbidities, stage of presentation, and other confounders are controlled for, minorities often receive a lower quality of health care than their white counterparts. These racial and ethnic disparities in quality of care contribute to disparities in health outcomes and higher costs. Radiology is not exempt from this issue, as disparities related to imaging services have been reported in the literature. The root causes of racial and ethnic disparities in health care are complex and include the negative impact of the social determinants of health, limited access to care, as well as health system, provider, and patient factors. The field of radiology has a unique opportunity to engage in efforts to improve quality, address disparities, and achieve equity. A call to action is necessary, with a focus on addressing social determinants of health; creating culturally, linguistically, and health literacy-appropriate outreach and services; investing in cross-cultural education; and diversifying the radiology workforce. Ultimately, radiologists can provide equitable access to radiology care and promote person-centered care solutions that are tailored to the needs of diverse populations.

Considering Stigma in the Provision of HIV Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis: Reflections from Current Prescribers.

Efforts to identify and address social inequities in HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) access are urgently needed. We investigated early-adopting PrEP prescribers' beliefs about how stigma contributes to PrEP access disparities in health care and explored potential intervention strategies within the context of PrEP service delivery. US-based PrEP prescribers were recruited through professional networks and participant referrals. Qualitative interviews were conducted, transcribed, and thematically analyzed. Participants (n = 18) were primarily male (72%); white (39%) or Asian (33%); and heterosexual (56%). Most practiced in the Northeastern (67%) or Southern (22%) United States; were physicians (94%); and specialized in HIV/infectious disease (89%). Participants described multiple forms of structural and interpersonal stigma impeding PrEP access. The requirement that PrEP be prescribed was a perceived deterrent for populations with medical mistrust and/or low health literacy. Practice norms such as discussing PrEP only in response to patient requests were seen as favoring more privileged groups. When probed about personally held biases, age-related stereotypes were the most readily acknowledged, including assumptions about older adults being sexually inactive and uncomfortable discussing sex. Participants criticized providers who chose not to prescribe PrEP within their clinical practice, particularly those whose decision reflected personal values related to condomless sex or discomfort communicating about sex with their patients. Suggested solutions included standardizing PrEP service delivery across patients and increasing cultural competence training. These early insights from a select sample of early-adopting providers illuminate mechanisms through which stigma could compromise PrEP access for key populations and corresponding points of intervention within the health care system.

Prevention paradox: Medical students are less inclined to prescribe HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis for patients in highest need.

INTRODUCTION: Despite healthcare providers' growing awareness of pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP), prescription rates remain low. PrEP is an efficacious HIV prevention strategy recommended for use with condoms but still protective in their absence. Concern about the impact of PrEP on condom use and other risk behaviour is, nonetheless, among the barriers to prescription commonly reported. To understand the implications of this concern for PrEP access, we examined how medical students' willingness to prescribe PrEP varied by patients' condom use and partnering practices. We also assessed the perceived acceptability of various reasons for condom discontinuation with PrEP. METHODS: An online survey was distributed to 854 medical students in the Northeastern US in 2015. Participants (n = 111) were surveyed about their willingness to prescribe PrEP for each of six male patients who systematically differed in their reported condom use (sustained use, sustained nonuse, or discontinuation with PrEP) and partnering practices (single male partner with untreated HIV or multiple male partners of unknown HIV status). Participants also reported perceived acceptability of four reasons for condom discontinuation: pleasure, sexual functioning, intimacy, and conception. RESULTS: Willingness to prescribe PrEP was inconsistent with patient risk: When the patient used condoms and planned to sustain condom use, most participants were willing to prescribe PrEP - 93% if the patient had a single partner and 86% if the patient had multiple partners. Fewer were willing to prescribe if the patient did not use condoms and planned to sustain nonuse (53% and 45%, respectively) or used condoms but planned to discontinue use (27% and 28%). Significantly fewer participants were willing to prescribe for a patient with multiple partners versus a single partner when the patient reported sustained condom use or sustained condom nonuse. The number of participants who were willing to prescribe was similarly low for a patient with multiple partners versus a single partner when the patient reported that he planned to discontinue condom use. More participants accepted a patient discontinuing condoms for conception (69%) than for intimacy (23%), pleasure (14%), or sexual functioning (13%). CONCLUSION: Medical students' clinical judgments were misaligned with patient risk and suggest misconceptions or personal values may undermine provision of optimal HIV prevention services.

Sexual Stereotypes Ascribed to Black Men Who Have Sex with Men: An Intersectional Analysis.

Sexual stereotypes may adversely affect the health of Black men who have sex with men (MSM). Greater understanding of the nature and nuances of these stereotypes is needed. This online, survey-based study used an inductive, intersectional approach to characterize the sexual stereotypes ascribed to Black MSM by the U.S. general public, their distinctiveness from those ascribed to Black men and MSM in general, and their relative prototypicality as compared to dominant subgroups. Members of the public, recruited in 2014-2015, were randomly assigned to survey conditions that varied systematically by race (Black, White, or unspecified) and sexual orientation (gay, heterosexual, or unspecified) of a designated social group. Participants (n = 285) reported stereotypes of their assigned group that they perceived to exist in U.S. culture in an open-response format. Cross-condition comparisons revealed that, overall, Black gay male stereotypes were non-prototypical of Black men or gay men. Rather, stereotypes of Black men were more similar to Black heterosexual men and stereotypes of gay men were more similar to White gay men. Nonetheless, 11 of the 15 most frequently reported Black gay male stereotypes overlapped with stereotypes of Black men (e.g., large penis), gay men (e.g., deviant), or both (e.g., promiscuous). Four stereotypes were unique relative to both Black men and gay men: down low, diseased, loud, and dirty. Findings suggest that Black MSM face multiple derogatory sexual stereotypes, several of which are group-specific. These stereotypes are consistent with cultural (mis)representations of Black MSM and suggest a need for more accurate portrayals of existing sexual diversity within this group.

A Closer Look at Racism and Heterosexism in Medical Students' Clinical Decision-Making Related to HIV Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP): Implications for PrEP Education.

Social biases among healthcare providers could limit PrEP access. In this survey study of 115 US medical students, we examined associations between biases (racism and heterosexism) and PrEP clinical decision-making and explored prior PrEP education as a potential buffer. After viewing a vignette about a PrEP-seeking MSM patient, participants reported anticipated patient behavior (condomless sex, extra-relational sex, and adherence), intention to prescribe PrEP to the patient, biases, and background characteristics. Minimal evidence for racism affecting clinical decision-making emerged. In unadjusted analyses, heterosexism indirectly affected prescribing intention via all anticipated behaviors, tested as parallel mediators. Participants expressing greater heterosexism more strongly anticipated increased risk behavior and adherence problems, which were associated with lower prescribing intention. The indirect effect via condomless sex remained significant adjusting for background characteristics. Prior PrEP education did not buffer any indirect effects. Heterosexism may compromise PrEP provision to MSM and should be addressed in PrEP-related medical education.

Organizational Change Management For Health Equity: Perspectives From The Disparities Leadership Program.

Leaders of health care organizations need to be prepared to improve quality and achieve equity in today's health care environment characterized by a focus on achieving value and addressing disparities in a diverse population. To help address this need, the Disparities Solutions Center at Massachusetts General Hospital launched the Disparities Leadership Program in 2007. The leadership program is an ongoing, year-long, executive education initiative that trains leaders from hospitals, health plans, and health centers to improve quality and eliminate racial and ethnic disparities in health care. Feedback from participating organizations demonstrates that health care leaders seem to possess knowledge about what disparities are and about what should be done to eliminate them. Data collection, performance measurement, and multifaceted interventions remain the tools of the trade. However, the barriers to success are lack of leadership buy-in, organizational prioritization, energy, and execution, which can be addressed through organizational change management strategies.

"Support Your Client at the Space That They're in": HIV Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) Prescribers' Perspectives on PrEP-Related Risk Compensation.

Despite the demonstrated effectiveness of HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) and evidence that most PrEP users do not engage in risk compensation (i.e., increased risk behavior due to a perceived decrease in HIV susceptibility), some healthcare providers report patient risk compensation to be a deterrent to prescribing PrEP. Overcoming this barrier is essential to supporting PrEP access and uptake among people at risk for HIV. To inform such efforts, this qualitative study explored PrEP-related risk compensation attitudes among providers with firsthand experience prescribing PrEP. US-based PrEP providers (n = 18), most of whom were HIV specialists, were recruited through direct outreach and referral from colleagues and other participants. Individual 90-min semistructured interviews were conducted by phone or in person from September 2014 through February 2015, transcribed, and thematically analyzed. Three attitudinal themes emerged: (1) providers' role is to support patients in making informed decisions, (2) risk behavior while taking PrEP does not fully offset PrEP's protective benefit (i.e., PrEP confers net protection, even with added behavioral risk), and (3) PrEP-related risk compensation is unduly stigmatized within and beyond the healthcare community. Participants were critical of other healthcare providers' negative judgment of patients and reluctance to prescribe PrEP due to anticipated risk compensation. Several providers also acknowledged an evolution in their thinking from initial ambivalence toward greater acceptance of PrEP and PrEP-related behavior change. PrEP providers' insights about risk compensation may help to address unsubstantiated concerns about PrEP-related risk compensation and challenge the acceptability of withholding PrEP on these grounds.

Measuring Medical Students' Preparedness and Skills to Provide Cross-Cultural Care.

Purpose: Cross-cultural education is an integral and required part of undergraduate medical curricula. However, the teaching of cross-cultural care varies widely and methods of evaluation are lacking. We sought to better understand medical students' perspectives on their own cultural competency across the 4-year curriculum using a validated survey instrument. Methods:We conducted an annual Internet-based survey at Harvard Medical School with students in all 4 years of training, for four consecutive years. We used a tool previously validated with residents and slightly modified it for medical students, assessing their (1) preparedness, (2) skillfulness, and (3) perspectives on the educational curriculum and learning climate. Results: Of 2592 possible survey responses, we received 1561 (60% response rate). Fourth-year students had significantly higher scores than first-year students (p<0.001) for all but one preparedness item (caring for transgender patients) and all but one skillfulness item (identifying ability to read/write English). Less than 50% of students felt adequately prepared/skilled by their fourth year on 8 of 11 preparedness items and 5 of 10 skillfulness items. Lack of practical experience caring for diverse patients was the most frequently cited challenge. Conclusions: While students reported that preparedness and skillfulness to care for culturally diverse patients seem to increase with training, fourth-year students still felt inadequately prepared and skilled in many important aspects of cross-cultural care. Medical schools can use this tool with students to self-assess cultural competency and to help guide enhancements to their curricula focusing on cross-cultural care.

Putting PrEP into Practice: Lessons Learned from Early-Adopting U.S. Providers' Firsthand Experiences Providing HIV Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis and Associated Care.

Optimizing access to HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP), an evidence-based HIV prevention resource, requires expanding healthcare providers' adoption of PrEP into clinical practice. This qualitative study explored PrEP providers' firsthand experiences relative to six commonly-cited barriers to prescription-financial coverage, implementation logistics, eligibility determination, adherence concerns, side effects, and anticipated behavior change (risk compensation)-as well as their recommendations for training PrEP-inexperienced providers. U.S.-based PrEP providers were recruited via direct outreach and referral from colleagues and other participants (2014-2015). One-on-one interviews were conducted in person or by phone, transcribed, and analyzed. The sample (n = 18) primarily practiced in the Northeastern (67%) or Southern (22%) U.S. Nearly all (94%) were medical doctors (MDs), most of whom self-identified as infectious disease specialists. Prior experience prescribing PrEP ranged from 2 to 325 patients. Overall, providers reported favorable experiences with PrEP implementation and indicated that commonly anticipated problems were minimal or manageable. PrEP was covered via insurance or other programs for most patients; however, pre-authorization requirements, laboratory/service provision costs, and high deductibles sometimes presented challenges. Various models of PrEP care and coordination with other providers were utilized, with several providers highlighting the value of clinical staff support. Eligibility was determined through joint decision-making with patients; CDC guidelines were commonly referenced but not considered absolute. Patient adherence was variable, with particularly strong adherence noted among patients who had actively sought PrEP (self-referred). Providers observed minimal adverse effects or increases in risk behavior. However, they identified several barriers with respect to accessing and engaging PrEP candidates. Providers offered a wide range of suggestions regarding content, strategy, and logistics surrounding PrEP training, highlighting sexual history-taking and sexual minority competence as areas to prioritize. These insights from early-adopting PrEP providers may facilitate adoption of PrEP into clinical practice by PrEP-inexperienced providers, thereby improving access for individuals at risk for HIV.