Dataset Information

Factors Influencing Clinicians' Willingness to Prescribe Pre-exposure Prophylaxis for Persons at High Risk of HIV in China: Cross-sectional Online Survey Study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is an effective HIV prevention measure. Clinicians play a crucial role in PrEP implementation, and their knowledge, attitudes, and career experience may affect their willingness to prescribe PrEP. However, little is known about the attitudes and willingness of clinicians to prescribe PrEP in countries without PrEP-specific guidelines.

Objective

We aimed to determine the factors associated with clinicians being willing to prescribe PrEP in China.

Methods

Between May and June 2019, we conducted an online cross-sectional survey of clinicians in 31 provinces across the six administrative regions in China on the WeChat smartphone app platform. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine factors associated with willingness to prescribe PrEP.

Results

Overall, 777 HIV clinicians completed the survey. Most of the respondents had heard of PrEP (563/777, 72.5%), 31.9% (248/777) thought that PrEP was extremely effective for reducing the risk of HIV infection, and 47.2% (367/777) thought that it was necessary to provide PrEP to high-risk groups. After adjusting for age, gender, ethnicity, and educational background of the clinicians, the following factors signiﬁcantly increased the odds of the clinicians being willing to prescribe PrEP: having worked for more than 10 years, compared to 5 years or less (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 2.82, 95% CI 1.96-4.05); having treated more than 100 patients living with HIV per month, compared to 50 patients or fewer (aOR 4.16, 95% CI 2.85-6.08); and having heard of PrEP (aOR 7.32, 95% CI 4.88-10.97). Clinicians were less likely to be willing to prescribe PrEP if they were concerned about poor adherence to PrEP (aOR 0.66, 95% CI 0.50-0.88), the lack of PrEP clinical guidelines (aOR 0.47, 95% CI 0.32-0.70), and the lack of drug indications for PrEP (aOR 0.49, 95% CI 0.32-0.76).

Conclusions

About half of all clinicians surveyed were willing to prescribe PrEP, but most surveyed had a low understanding of PrEP. Lack of PrEP clinical guidelines, lack of drug indications, and less than 11 years of work experience were the main barriers to the surveyed clinicians' willingness to prescribe PrEP. Development of PrEP clinical guidelines and drug indications, as well as increasing the availability of PrEP training, could help improve understanding of PrEP among clinicians and, thus, increase the number willing to prescribe PrEP.

SUBMITTER: Cui S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8214180 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background and objectivesLess than 10 percent of the more than one million people vulnerable to HIV are using pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP). Practitioners are critical to ensuring the delivery of PrEP across care settings. In this study, we target a group of prescribers focused on providing HIV care and seeking up-to-date information about HIV. We assessed their experiences prescribing PrEP, whether these experiences differed by clinical specialty, and examined associations between willingness to prescribe PrEP as a "best first step" and different hypothetical prescribing scenarios.Setting and methodsBetween March and May 2015, we circulated a paper survey to 954 participants ((652 of whom met our inclusion criteria of being independent prescribers and 519 of those (80%) responded to the survey)) at continuing medical education advanced-level HIV courses in five locations across the US on practitioner practices and preferences of PrEP. We employed multivariable logistic regression analysis for binary and collapsed ordinal outcomes.ResultsAmong this highly motivated group of practitioners, only 54% reported ever prescribing PrEP. Internal medicine practitioners were 1.6 times more likely than infectious disease practitioners to have prescribed PrEP (95% CI: 0.99-2.60, p = .0524) and age, years of training, and sex were significantly associated with prescribing experience. Based on clinical vignettes describing different hypothetical prescribing scenarios, practitioners who viewed PrEP as the first clinical step for persons who inject drugs (PWID) were twice as likely to have also considered PrEP as the first clinical option for safer conception, and vice-a-versa (95% CI: 1.4-3.2, p < .001). Practitioners considering PrEP as the first preventive option for MSM were nearly six times as likely to also consider PrEP as the first clinical step for PWID, and vice-a-versa (95% CI: 2.28-13.56, p = .0002).ConclusionsOur findings indicate that even among a subset of HIV-focused practitioners, PrEP prescribing is not routine. This group of practitioners could be an optimal group to engage individuals that could most benefit from PrEP.

Project description:BackgroundAmong health care providers, prescription of HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) has been low. Little is known specifically about primary care physicians (PCPs) with regard to PrEP awareness and adoption (i.e., prescription or referral), and factors associated with adoption.ObjectiveTo assess PrEP awareness, PrEP adoption, and factors associated with adoption among PCPs.DesignCross-sectional online survey conducted in April and May 2015.RespondentsMembers of a national professional organization for academic primary care physicians (n?=?266).Main measuresPrEP awareness, PrEP adoption (ever prescribed or referred a patient for PrEP [yes/no]), provider and practice characteristics, and self-rated knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs associated with adoption.Key resultsThe survey response rate was 8.6 % (266/2093). Ninety-three percent of respondents reported prior awareness of PrEP. Of these, 34.9 % reported PrEP adoption. In multivariable analysis of provider and practice characteristics, compared with non-adopters, adopters were more likely to provide care to more than 50 HIV-positive patients (vs. 0, aOR?=?6.82, 95 % CI 2.06-22.52). Compared with non-adopters, adopters were also more likely to report excellent, very good, or good self-rated PrEP knowledge (15.1 %, 33.7 %, 30.2 % vs. 2.5 %, 18.1 %, 23.8 %, respectively; p?<?0.001) and to perceive PrEP as extremely safe (35.1 % vs. 10.7 %; p?=?0.002). Compared with non-adopters, adopters were less likely to perceive PrEP as being moderately likely to increase risk behaviors ("risk compensation") (12.8 % vs. 28.8 %, p?=?0.02).ConclusionsWhile most respondents were aware of PrEP, only one-third of PrEP-aware PCPs reported adoption. Adopters were more likely to have experience providing HIV care and to perceive PrEP as extremely safe, and were less likely to perceive PrEP use as leading to risk compensation. To enhance PCP adoption of PrEP, educational efforts targeting PCPs without HIV care experience should be considered, as well as training those with HIV care experience to be PrEP "clinical champions". Concerns about safety and risk compensation must also be addressed.