English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Objective  Adoption of pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) to prevent HIV infection has been slow. The purpose of this study was to evaluate knowledge, attitudes and referral practices for PrEP among non-prescribing providers, who may play key role.    Methods  We performed a cross-sectional survey on PrEP knowledge, attitudes, and referral practices among 66 non-prescribing HIV prevention providers (1st August to 31st December, 2016), in Philadelphia, followed by qualitative interviews with 12 of them (5th April to 10th May, 2017).    Results  Participants had a mean age of 36 years, with 62% females. Majority were HIV case managers and rapid testers. For half of the respondents, PrEP eligibility screening was part of rapid HIV testing at their organization, 40% never had PrEP training and only 27% indicated personally screening clients for eligibility. Qualitative data revealed that participants held positive attitudes about PrEP and perceived organizational support, but had concerns about potential negative impacts and barriers to routine HIV screening.    Conclusion  Results highlight the importance of training non-prescribing HIV prevention providers about PrEP, addressing their concerns, and incorporating PrEP screening and referral into routine HIV testing.

Attitudes and referral practices for pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) among HIV rapid testers and case managers in Philadelphia: A mixed methods study