Understanding Psychosocial Determinants of PrEP Uptake Among Cisgender Women Experiencing Heightened HIV Risk: Implications for Multi-Level Communication Intervention.

Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is a highly effective daily pill that decreases the likelihood of HIV acquisition by up to 92% among individuals at risk for HIV. PrEP can be discretely used, autonomously controlled, and in place at the time of risk exposure, making it an especially promising method for HIV prevention for cisgender women (CGW). But, PrEP is underutilized by CGW relative to the demonstrable need. We apply the Integrative Model of Behavioral Prediction to identify the critical psychosocial factors that shape CGW's intentions to use PrEP and their relevant underlying beliefs. We surveyed (N = 294) community- and clinic-recruited PrEP eligible CGW to understand the relative importance of attitudes, norms, and efficacy in shaping PrEP intentions. We utilized structural equation modeling to identify the relevant paths. We inspected the summary statistics in relation to three message three selection criteria. We identified beliefs that demonstrated (1) an association with intention, (2) substantial room to move the population, (3) practicality as a target for change through communication intervention. Results show that PrEP awareness was low. When women learned about PrEP, they voiced positive intentions to use it. There were significant and positive direct effects of SE (0.316***), attitudes (0.201**), and subjective norms (0.249***) on intention to initiate PrEP. We illustrate the strategic identification of beliefs within the relevant paths using the 3 belief selection criteria. We also discuss implications for social and structural communication interventions to support women's HIV prevention.

Age-related factors associated with intention to initiate pre-exposure prophylaxis among cisgender women in Washington D.C.

Background: Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) utilization among cisgender women (subsequently 'women') is low across age groups, relative to their risk of HIV acquisition. We hypothesize that age-related differences in psychosocial factors also influence women's intention to initiate oral PrEP in Washington, D.C. Methods: A secondary analysis of a cross-sectional survey data was performed to evaluate factors influencing intention to initiate oral PrEP among women seen at a family planning and a sexual health clinic. A bivariate analysis was performed to identify differences by age group in demographic characteristics, indications for PrEP, and attitudes toward PrEP; we then performed additional bivariate analysis to assess these variables in relation to PrEP intention. Results: Across age groups, perceived risk of HIV acquisition was not significantly different and was not associated with intention to initiate PrEP. Awareness of and attitude toward PrEP, injunctive norms, descriptive norms, and self-efficacy were not different across age, however there were significant age-associated differences in relation to PrEP intention. Specifically, among 18-24-year-olds, intention to start PrEP was associated with support from provider (p = 0.03), main sexual partner (p < 0.01), and peers (p < 0.01). For women 25-34 years old, having multiple sexual partners (p = 0.03) and support from casual sexual partners (p = 0.03) was also important. Among women 35-44 years old, prior awareness of PrEP (p = 0.02) and their children's support of PrEP uptake (p < 0.01) were associated with intention to initiate PrEP. Among 45-55 year-old women intention to initiate PrEP was positively associated with engaging in casual sex (p = 0.03) and negatively associated with stigma (p < 0.01). Conclusion: Overall, there were more similarities than differences in factors influencing intention to initiate PrEP across age groups. Observed differences offer an opportunity to tailor PrEP delivery and HIV prevention interventions to increase awareness and uptake for cisgender women.

Research showing how women's age affects their decision to start pre-exposure prophylaxis to prevent HIV in Washington, DC We know that many women need pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) to prevent HIV infection in Washington, DC, yet the number of women who use PrEP is lower than expected. The study was done to determine whether a woman's age affects her decision to start PrEP. This is important because providers need to know the factors affecting a woman's decision to start PrEP in order to increase PrEP use in at-risk patients. We re-analyzed a set of data that was generated from surveys given to women in a women's health clinic. The surveys asked women about their background, including risk factors for HIV infection, and their awareness of and attitudes toward PrEP. We also asked women questions that were meant to determine their belief in their own ability to make decisions as well as the degree to which other people in their life affect their own decisions. We wanted to know whether age affects the degree to which these characteristics affect women's decision to start PrEP. Overall, there were more similarities than differences between age groups when looking at how different factors affect the decision to start PrEP. Across age groups, there were no differences in how women view their risk of HIV infection. We found that 18-24-year-olds were more likely to start PrEP when they felt support from their provider, main sexual partner, and peers. 25-34-year-olds were more likely to start PrEP when they felt this same source of support and had had multiple sexual partners. 35-44-year-olds were more likely to start PREP when they already had awareness of PrEP or had their children's support of their PrEP use. 45-55-year-olds were more likely to start PrEP when they had engaged in casual sex and were less likely to start PrEP if they expected negative judgement for it. Even though there were significant similarities between age groups, the differences that we found offer an opportunity to tailor PrEP awareness and interventions to promote PrEP use among women.

Gabapentin as an adjunct for pain management during dilation and evacuation: A double-blind randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the analgesic efficacy of preoperative gabapentin among patients undergoing dilation and evacuation (D&E) with moderate sedation. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a randomized, controlled, double-blind trial among patients undergoing same-day D&E at 14 to 19 weeks gestation under moderate sedation. We randomized participants 1:1 to gabapentin 600 mg or placebo after cervical preparation at least 1 hour prior to D&E. We assessed pain using a 100-mm visual analog scale before, during, and after the procedure. The primary outcome was postoperative recall of maximum procedural pain with a 13-mm a priori threshold for clinical significance. We standardized initial fentanyl and midazolam dosing. We assessed satisfaction with pain control, nausea, and vomiting via Likert scales and anxiety using a validated instrument. RESULTS: We enrolled 126 participants and randomized 61 to gabapentin and 65 to placebo, with study medication administered a mean of 211 (SD 64) minutes preoperatively. Recall of maximum pain was 41 mm for gabapentin and 49 mm for placebo (p = 0.24). Gabapentin resulted in reduced pain during uterine aspiration (56 vs 71 mm, p= 0.003) compared to placebo, but not for any other time points. The gabapentin group had higher satisfaction (78% vs 65% very or somewhat satisfied, p= 0.01). Median fentanyl dose was lower in the gabapentin group (75 vs 100 mcg, p = 0.005). Midazolam dose, nausea, vomiting, and anxiety did not differ between groups. No serious adverse events occurred in the gabapentin group. Sedation reversal was not required. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of gabapentin to moderate sedation during D&E did not result in lower maximum recalled procedural pain. Gabapentin resulted in reduced intra-operative pain during uterine aspiration and increased satisfaction with pain control. IMPLICATIONS: Gabapentin reduces intraoperative pain and improves satisfaction with pain management when administered prior to second-trimester surgical abortion and may be considered as an adjunct to intravenous sedation. Moderate sedation may impair assessment and recall of pain. Additional research is needed to identify the most effective pain management regimens for D&E.

Integrating HIV Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis into Family Planning Care: A RE-AIM Framework Evaluation.

We aimed to systematically evaluate the feasibility of integrating HIV prevention services, including pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP), into a family planning setting in a high-prevalence community. We used the RE-AIM Framework (Reach, Efficacy, Adoption, Implementation, Maintenance) to evaluate the integration of HIV prevention services into a family planning clinic over 6 months. Before the integration, PrEP was not offered. We implemented a staff training program on HIV PrEP. We determined the proportion of women presenting to the clinic who were screened, eligible for, and initiated PrEP through chart review. We assessed staff comfort with PrEP pre- and post-integration. We compared planned and actual implementation, interviewed staff to determine barriers and facilitators, and tracked systems adaptations. We assessed maintenance of PrEP after the study concluded. There were 640 clinical encounters for 515 patients; the rate of HIV counseling and PrEP screening was 50%. The rate was 10% in month 1 and peaked to 65% in month 3. Nearly all screened patients were eligible for PrEP (98.4%) and 15 patients (6%) initiated PrEP. Staff knowledge and comfort discussing PrEP improved after education. Facilitators included partnering with local experts, continuing education, clinical tools for providers, and patient education materials. Barriers included competing priorities during clinical encounters, limited woman-centered patient education materials, and insurance-related barriers. Embedding HIV prevention services in the family planning setting was feasible in this pilot. The proportion of women screened for PrEP rapidly increased. In this high HIV prevalence community, nearly all screened women were eligible and 6% initiated PrEP.

A factorial-design randomized controlled trial comparing misoprostol alone to Dilapan with misoprostol and comparing buccal to vaginal misoprostol for same-day cervical preparation prior to dilation & evacuation at 14 weeks 0 days-19 weeks 6 days gestation.

OBJECTIVES: To compare procedure times following same-day cervical preparation using misoprostol 400 mcg alone or misoprostol 400 mcg plus hygroscopic dilators for dilation and evacuation (D&E) before 20 weeks gestation and to compare side effects of buccal and vaginal misoprostol administration. STUDY DESIGN: We randomized women undergoing D&E at 14 weeks 0 days-19 weeks 6 days gestation to receive (1) hygroscopic dilators or not and (2) buccal or vaginal misoprostol using a 2 × 2 factorial design. We assessed two primary outcomes: (1) total procedure time, defined as time to insert hygroscopic dilators plus D&E time, and (2) side effects of misoprostol 4-6 h after initiation of cervical preparation using a 5-point Likert scale assessing nausea, emesis, diarrhea, chills and cramps. RESULTS: We randomized 163 women and 161 completed the study. We completed all procedures in one day. Mean total procedure time was 14.0 and 10.8 min. with and without hygroscopic dilators (difference 3.2 minutes, 95% CI 1.7, 4.6). Mean D&E procedure time was 0.7 (95% CI -0.8, 2.1) min longer without hygroscopic dilators. Initial cervical dilation was 15.6 and 11.7 mm with and without hygroscopic dilators (difference 3.9 mm, 95% CI 3.1, 4.8). Participants receiving buccal misoprostol reported less chills (1.9) than women receiving vaginal misoprostol (2.3), p = 0.04. CONCLUSIONS: Hygroscopic dilators with misoprostol requires more time and increases cervical dilation without shortening D&E time when used for cervical preparation 4-6 h prior to D&E before 20 weeks. Women receiving vaginal misoprostol may have more chills compared to buccal misoprostol. IMPLICATIONS: Adding hygroscopic dilators to misoprostol for same day D&E procedures at less than 20 weeks gestation increases total intervention time without reducing D&E time and is less favored by patients. Clinical judgment requires balancing relative effectiveness with patient preference. Further studies should evaluate the side effect profile of vaginal misoprostol.

Increasing Use of Long-Acting Reversible Contraception to Decrease Unplanned Pregnancy.

Unintended pregnancy remains high in the United States, accounting for one-half of pregnancies. Both contraceptive nonuse and imperfect use contribute to unplanned pregnancies. Long-acting reversible contraception (LARC) have greater efficacy than shorter acting methods. Data from large studies show that unplanned pregnancy rates are lower among women using LARC. However, overall use of LARC is low; of the reproductive age women using contraception, less than 10% are LARC users. Barriers include lack of knowledge and high up-front cost, and prevent more widespread use. Overcoming these barriers and increasing the number of women using LARC will decrease unplanned pregnancies and abortions.

Safety and Efficacy of Contraceptive Methods for Obese and Overweight Women.

Increasing rates of obesity have become a major public health challenge. Given the added health risks that obese women have during pregnancy, preventing unwanted pregnancy is imperative. Clinicians who provide contraception must understand the efficacy, risks, and the weight changes associated with various contraceptive methods. Despite differences in the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of hormonal contraceptives in overweight and obese women, efficacy does not appear to be severely impacted. Both estrogen-containing contraceptives and obesity increase the risk of venous thromboembolism, but the absolute risk remains acceptably low in reproductive age women.

The methodology for developing a prospective meta-analysis in the family planning community.

BACKGROUND: Prospective meta-analysis (PMA) is a collaborative research design in which individual sites perform randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and pool the data for meta-analysis. Members of the PMA collaboration agree upon specific research interventions and outcome measures, ideally before initiation but at least prior to any individual trial publishing results. This allows for uniform reporting of primary and secondary outcomes. With this approach, heterogeneity among trials contributing data for the final meta-analysis is minimized while each site maintains the freedom to design a specific trial. This paper describes the process of creating a PMA collaboration to evaluate the impact of misoprostol on ease of intrauterine device (IUD) insertion in nulliparous women. METHODS: After the principal investigator developed a preliminary PMA protocol, he identified potential collaborating investigators at other sites. One site already had a trial underway and another site was in the planning stages of a trial meeting PMA requirements. Investigators at six sites joined the PMA collaborative. Each site committed to enroll subjects to meet a pre-determined total sample size. A final common research plan and site responsibilities were developed and agreed upon through email and face-to-face meetings. Each site committed to contribute individual patient data to the PMA collaboration, and these data will be analyzed and prepared as a multi-site publication. Individual sites retain the ability to analyze and publish their site's independent findings. RESULTS: All six sites have obtained Institutional Review Board approval and each has obtained individual funding to meet the needs of that site's study. Sites have shared resources including study protocols and consents to decrease costs and improve study flow. This PMA protocol is registered with the Cochrane Collaboration and data will be analyzed according to Cochrane standards for meta-analysis. CONCLUSIONS: PMA is a novel research method that improves meta-analysis by including several study sites, establishing uniform reporting of specific outcomes, and yet allowing some independence on the part of individual sites with respect to the conduct of research. The inclusion of several sites increases statistical power to address important clinical questions. Compared to multi-center trials, PMA methodology encourages collaboration, aids in the development of new investigators, decreases study costs, and decreases time to publication. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00613366, NCT00886834, NCT01001897, NCT01147497 and NCT01307111.