Open AccessHIV Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis Implementation Cascade Among Health Care Professionals in the United States: Implications from a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Author(s) -
Chen Zhang,
James M. McMahon,
Kevin Fiscella,
Sarahmona M. Przybyla,
Amy Braksmajer,
Natalie M. Leblanc,
Yu Liu
Publication year - 2019
Publication title -
aids patient care and stds
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.504
H-Index - 85
eISSN - 1557-7449
pISSN - 1087-2914
DOI - 10.1089/apc.2019.0119
Subject(s) - medicine , pre exposure prophylaxis , family medicine , odds ratio , medical prescription , thematic analysis , confidence interval , health care , medline , human immunodeficiency virus (hiv) , nursing , men who have sex with men , qualitative research , sociology , political science , law , economics , economic growth , social science , syphilis
Although pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) has been approved for primary HIV prevention for individuals aged 18 years or older since 2012, PrEP utilization has been suboptimal. To understand trends in PrEP provision from the health care providers' perspective, we systematically assessed each specific stage along the PrEP implementation cascade (i.e., awareness, willingness, consultation, and prescription) among health care professionals (HCPs) in the United States. Between June and December 2018, we conducted a systematic review of published studies on this topic. A total of 36 eligible studies were identified and included in the analyses. Random-effect models were employed to examine the pooled prevalence of each key stage along the cascade. Time trend and subgroup analyses were conducted. A thematic analysis was used to identify barriers and facilitators along the PrEP cascade. In this study, a total of 18,265 HCPs representing diverse demographics were included. The pooled prevalence of PrEP awareness was 68% [95% confidence interval (CI) = 55-80%], willingness to prescribe PrEP was 66% (95% CI = 54-77%), PrEP consultation was 37% (95% CI = 25-51%), and prescription provision was 24% (95% CI = 17-32%). Subgroup analyses revealed that PrEP provision among HCPs was lowest in the south, but has been improving annually nationwide. Infectious disease specialists [odds ratio (OR) = 4.06, 95% CI = 3.12-5.28; compared with primary care providers] and advanced practice registered nurses/physician assistants (OR = 1.51, 95% CI = 1.09-2.09; compared with physicians) had higher odds of prescribing PrEP. Barriers and facilitators regarding optimal PrEP implementation were embedded within individual, dyadic, social, and structural levels. This meta-analysis has comprehensively examined the trend and pattern of PrEP implementation among HCPs. To achieve optimal implementation of the PrEP cascade in the United States, tailored training and programs need to be provided to HCPs.