Premium
HIV health care providers are ready to introduce pre‐exposure prophylaxis in Central and Eastern Europe and neighbouring countries: data from the Euroguidelines in Central and Eastern Europe ( ECEE ) Network Group
Author(s) -
Kowalska JD,
Bursa D,
Jilich D,
Tomazic J,
Vasylyev M,
Bukovinowa P,
Mulabdic V,
Antonyak S,
Horban A
Publication year - 2018
Publication title -
hiv medicine
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.53
H-Index - 79
eISSN - 1468-1293
pISSN - 1464-2662
DOI - 10.1111/hiv.12641
Subject(s) - medicine , pre exposure prophylaxis , human immunodeficiency virus (hiv) , family medicine , emtricitabine , health care , european region , environmental health , men who have sex with men , economic growth , antiretroviral therapy , viral load , geography , syphilis , regional science , economics
Objectives Pre‐exposure prophylaxis (Pr EP ) for HIV infection has been introduced in only a few European countries. We investigated the potential to provide PrEP in the Central and Eastern European region, and in neighbouring countries. Methods The Euroguidelines in Central and Eastern Europe ( ECEE ) Network Group was formed in February 2016 to review standards of care for HIV infection in the region. Information related to Pr EP was collected through on‐line surveys. Respondents were recruited by ECEE members based on their involvement in HIV care. Results Seventy‐six respondents from 23 countries participated in the survey. Twenty‐six (34.2%) respondents reported that Pr EP [tenofovir disoproxil fumarate ( TDF )/emtricitabine ( FTC )] was registered by the drug registration authority in their country. Fifty‐three (70.7%) respondents reported being aware of ‘informal’ Pr EP use in their country. If they had access to Pr EP , 56 (74.7%) would advise its use in their practice. Forty‐five (59.2%) respondents had concerns regarding Pr EP use, and 10 (13.3%) expressed the need for more training. Most of the respondents (88.2%) would provide Pr EP to people with high‐risk behaviours. Conclusions Pr EP is already used informally in some countries in the region. Physicians are keen to use Pr EP if and when it is accessible. Obstacles towards implementing Pr EP in those countries were mostly related to lack of national guidelines, drug registration and governmental strategy.