Why do HIV PrEP Patients Become Lost-to-Care and How Can We Improve PrEP Retention?
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17140/HARTOJ-6-130Keywords:
HIV/AIDS, Pre-exposure prophylaxis, Retention and care, Socioeconomic factors, Adolescent Health, Lesbian/Gay/Bisexual/Transgender PersonsAbstract
Objectives
To assess reasons for patients being lost-to-care (LTC) at an urban health center (Philadelphia, PA, USA) that provides access to oral tenofovir/emtricitabine(TDF/FTC) as pre- exposure prophylaxis(PrEP) to patients ages 13-30 years through a drop-in model of care.
Methods
Ninety-nine patients were identified as LTC based on not visiting a clinician in ≥4 months during the period April 2016-January 2017. Patients were contacted by phone/email to participate in a voluntary telephone survey regarding reasons for falling out of care. Results were analyzed descriptively.
Results
Of the 99 patients preliminarily identified as LTC, 19 completed the survey. Reason(s) for becoming LTC included: 47%(9) relocation, 11%(2) transportation difficulties to/from clinic, 26%(5) financial/insurance problems, 5%(1) perceived medication side effects, 16%(3) trouble remembering to attend appointments regularly, 5%(1) difficulty with daily medication adherence, and 0% social stigma. Furthermore, 21%(4) remain at high-risk of HIV/STI acquisition after becoming LTC. The main study limitations are selection bias and small sample size, where the small sample size did not allow for statistical significance.
Conclusion
While the major cause for becoming LTC was relocation, these findings suggest 37% of LTC incidences may be preventable with additional/up-front support. Because 21% of LTC patients remain at high-risk of HIV/STI acquisition, proactive re-engagement initiatives are potentially useful.
References
90-90-90: An ambitious treatment target to help end the AIDS epidemic. 2014. Web site. https://www.unaids.org/en/resources/ documents/2017/90-90-90. Accessed June 11, 2019.
United States Local Programs. Web site. http://www.prepwatch. org/policies-and-programs/local-programs/. 2016. Accessed June 11, 2019.
Meyers K, Golub SA. Planning ahead for implementation of long acting HIV prevention: Challenges and opportuni-ties. Curr Opin HIV AIDS. 2015; 10(4): 290-295. doi: 10.1097/ COH.0000000000000159 Original Research | Volume 6 | Number 1| Jayaraman S, et al
Underhill K, Operario D, Mimiaga MJ, Skeer MR, Mayer KH. Implementation science of pre-exposure prophylaxis: Preparing for public use. Curr HIV/AIDS Rep. 2010; 7(4): 210-219. doi: 10.1007/s11904-010-0062-4
Krakower D, Ware N, Mitty JA, Maloney K, Mayer KH. HIV providers’ perceived barriers and facilitators to implementing pre-exposure prophylaxis in care settings: A qualitative study. AIDS Behav. 2014; 18(9): 1712-1721. doi: 10.1007/s10461-014-0839-3
Hoffman S, Guidry JA, Collier KL, et al. A clinical home for preexposure prophylaxis: Diverse health care providers’ perspec-tives on the “purview paradox”. J Int Assoc Provid AIDS Care. 2016; 15(1): 59-65. doi: 10.1177/2325957415600798
Liu A, Cohen S, Follansbee S, et al., Early experiences imple-menting pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) for HIV prevention in San Francisco. PLoS Med. 2014; 11(3): e1001613. doi: 10.1371/ journal.pmed.1001613
Slesnick N, Kang MJ, Bonomi AE, Prestopnik JL. Six- and twelve-month outcomes among homeless youth accessing therapy and case management services through an urban drop-in center. Health Serv Res. 2008; 43(1 Pt 1): 211-229. doi: 10.1111/j.1475- 6773.2007.00755.x
Kelley CF, Kahle E, Siegler A. Applying a PrEP continuum of care for men Who have sex with men in Atlanta, Georgia. Clin Infect Dis. 2015; 61(10): 1590-1597. doi: 10.1093/cid/civ664
Arnold T, Brinkley-Rubinstein L, Chan PA, et al. Social, struc-tural, behavioral and clinical factors influencing retention in Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) care in Mississippi. PLoS One. 2017; 12(2): e0172354. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0172354
Chan PA, Mena L, Patel R, et al. Retention in care outcomes for HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis implementation programmes among men who have sex with men in three US cities. J Int AIDS Soc. 2016; 19(1): 20903. doi: 10.7448/IAS.19.1.20903
Kumar S, Quinn SC, Kim KH, Musa D, Hilyard KM, Freimuth VS. The social ecological model as a framework for determinants of 2009 H1N1 influenza vaccine uptake in the United States. Health Educ Behav. 2012; 39(2): 229-243. doi: 10.1177/1090198111415105
McLeroy KR, Bibeau D, Steckler A, Glanz K. An ecological perspective on health promotion programs. Health Educ Q. 1988; 15(4): 351-377. doi: 10.1177/109019818801500401
CAHPS Clinical and Group Survey. Web site. http://www. cahps.ahrq.gov/surveys-guidance/cg/instructions/index.html. Accessed June 11, 2019.
Skarbinski J, Rosenberg E, Paz-Bailey G, et al. Human immu-nodeficiency virus transmission at each step of the care continuum in the United States. JAMA Intern Med. 2015; 175(4): 588-596. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2014.8180
Marks G, Gardner LI, Craw J, Crepaz N. Entry and retention in medical care among HIV-diagnosed persons: A meta-analysis. Aids. 2010; 24(17): 2665-2678. doi: 10.1097/QAD.0b013e32833f4b1b
Woodward B. Retention in HIV care: Risk factors, interven-tions, and identifying those in need of support. Retention in care 2016. Web site. https://aidsetc.org/topic/retention-care. Accessed June 11, 2019.
IAPAC Guidelines for Optimizing the HIV Care Continuum For Adults and Adolescents, I.A.o.P.o.A. Care, Web site. http:// www.iapac.org. Accessed June 11, 2019.
Wohl AR, Dierst-Davies R, Victoroff A, et al. Implementa-tion and operational research: The navigation program: An inter-vention to reengage lost patients at 7 HIV clinics in Los Angeles 15 Jayaraman S, et al County, 2012-2014. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2016; 71(2): e44- e50. doi: 10.1097/QAI.0000000000000871
Moore DJ, Jain S, Dubé MP, et al. Randomized controlled trial of daily text messages to support adherence to preexposure pro-phylaxis in individuals at risk for human immunodeficiency virus: The TAPIR study. Clin Infect Dis. 2018; 66(10): 1566-1572. doi: 10.1093/cid/cix1055
Gardner LI, Giordano TP, Marks G, et al. Enhanced personal contact with HIV patients improves retention in primary care: A randomized trial in 6 US HIV clinics. Clin Infect Dis. 2014; 59(5): 725-734. doi: 10.1093/cid/ciu357
CDC, Social Ecological Model. Division of Cancer Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Web site. https://www.cdc.gov/cancer/dcpc/about/index.htm.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
All content published in HIV/AIDS Research and Treatment (HRT) is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). This license allows anyone to copy, distribute, transmit, and adapt the work — including for commercial purposes — provided appropriate credit is given to the original author(s) and source.
