Wheelock Ana, Eisingerich Andreas B, Gomez Gabriela B, Gray Emily, Dybul Mark R, Piot Peter
Centre for Patient Safety and Service Quality, Imperial College London, London, UK.
BMJ Open. 2012 Jul 2;2(4). doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2012-001234. Print 2012.
To examine policymakers and providers' views on pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) and their willingness to support its introduction, to inform policy and practice in this emerging field.
Semistructured qualitative interview study.
Peru, Ukraine, India, Kenya, Uganda, Botswana and South Africa.
35 policymakers, 35 healthcare workers and 21 non-governmental organisation representatives involved in HIV prevention.
Six themes emerged from the data: (1) perceived HIV prevention landscape: prevention initiatives needed to be improved and expanded; (2) PrEP awareness: 50 of 91 participants had heard of PrEP; (3) benefits of PrEP: one component of the combination prevention arsenal that could help prioritise HIV prevention, empower key populations and result in economic gains; (4) challenges of PrEP: regimen complexity, cost and cost-effectiveness, risk compensation, efficacy and effectiveness, stigmatisation and criminalisation, information and training and healthcare system capacity; (5) programmatic considerations: user eligibility, communication strategy, cost, distribution, medication and HIV testing compliance and (6) early versus late implementation: participants were divided as to whether they would support an early introduction of PrEP in their country or would prefer to wait until it has been successfully implemented in other countries, with around half of those we spoke to supporting each option. Very few said they would not support PrEP at all.
Despite the multiple challenges identified, there was general willingness to support the introduction of PrEP. Yet, strengthening existing HIV prevention efforts was also deemed necessary. Our results suggest that an effective PrEP programme would be delivered in healthcare facilities and involve non-governmental organisations and the community and consider the needs of mobile populations. Comprehensive information packages and training for users and providers would be critical. The cost of PrEP would be affordable and possibly segmented. Extensive counselling and innovative monitoring measures ought to be considered.
探讨政策制定者和服务提供者对暴露前预防(PrEP)的看法及其支持引入PrEP的意愿,为这一新兴领域的政策和实践提供参考。
半结构化定性访谈研究。
秘鲁、乌克兰、印度、肯尼亚、乌干达、博茨瓦纳和南非。
35名政策制定者、35名医护人员以及21名参与艾滋病预防工作的非政府组织代表。
数据中出现了六个主题:(1)对艾滋病预防情况的认知:预防措施需要改进和扩大;(2)对PrEP的认知:91名参与者中有50人听说过PrEP;(3)PrEP的益处:联合预防手段的一个组成部分,有助于优先开展艾滋病预防工作,增强关键人群的能力并带来经济效益;(4)PrEP面临的挑战:用药方案复杂、成本及成本效益、风险补偿、疗效和有效性、污名化和刑事定罪、信息与培训以及医疗系统能力;(5)项目实施考虑因素:使用者资格、沟通策略、成本、分发、药物治疗以及艾滋病检测依从性;(6)早期实施与晚期实施:参与者对于是否支持在本国早期引入PrEP存在分歧,一部分人倾向于等待PrEP在其他国家成功实施后再引入,我们访谈的人中约有一半支持每种选择。极少有人表示完全不支持PrEP。
尽管发现了诸多挑战,但普遍愿意支持引入PrEP。然而,加强现有的艾滋病预防工作也被认为是必要的。我们的研究结果表明,有效的PrEP项目将在医疗机构实施,涉及非政府组织和社区,并考虑流动人群的需求。为使用者和服务提供者提供全面的信息包和培训至关重要。PrEP的成本应是可承受的,并且可能需要区分对待。应考虑广泛的咨询和创新的监测措施。