Post-exposure Prophylaxis Awareness, Knowledge, Access and Use Among Three Populations in New York City, 2016–17

2018 ◽  
Vol 22 (8) ◽  
pp. 2718-2732 ◽  
Author(s):  
Beryl A. Koblin ◽  
DaShawn Usher ◽  
Vijay Nandi ◽  
Hong-Van Tieu ◽  
Eddie Bravo ◽  
...  
2020 ◽  
Vol 31 (2) ◽  
pp. 672-681
Author(s):  
Matthew A. Adan ◽  
Jason Zucker ◽  
Caroline Carnevale ◽  
William L. Grant ◽  
Alwyn T. Cohall ◽  
...  

2017 ◽  
Vol 65 (11) ◽  
pp. 1843-1847 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert J Arciuolo ◽  
Rachel R Jablonski ◽  
Jane R Zucker ◽  
Jennifer B Rosen

2018 ◽  
Vol 5 (suppl_1) ◽  
pp. S20-S21
Author(s):  
Allison Glaser ◽  
Emma Kaplan-Lewis ◽  
Ana Ventuneac ◽  
Wyley Gates ◽  
Michael Cruz ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Oral post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) is effective in preventing HIV transmission. To minimize barriers to PEP for New York City (NYC) residents, the Institute for Advanced Medicine (IAM), Mount Sinai Health System, and the NYC Department of Health and Mental Health established a 24-hour 7-days PEP hotline to provide eligible callers with immediate access to PEP and follow-up clinical care. Methods Data from hotline callers (January to December 2017) was analyzed utilizing multivariable logistic regression to determine whether a call resulted in PEP access within 72 hours of exposure by sociodemographic variables and exposure characteristics. We describe transitions from PEP to PrEP (pre-exposure prophylaxis). Results The PEP hotline cohort (n = 1278) was 83% male, 11% female, 1% transgender; 66% LGBTQ and 20% heterosexual; 35% White, 15% Black, 9% Asian; 41% other/unknown; 25% Hispanic; mean age of 30 years (range 14–72). The majority of callers learned about the hotline by Internet search (59%). Mean exposure time prior to call was 31 hours with 57% within 24 hours. Exposures were 98% sexual; 73% anal sex (43% receptive; 30% insertive), 21% vaginal, and 6% other. 63% reported condomless sex and 29% condom failure. 15% of callers reported a partner with HIV. 35% of callers reported alcohol or recreational substances at the time of the exposure. Prior PEP and PrEP use was 20% and 9%, respectively. 91% of callers were eligible for PEP; 69% called afterhours and received a telephone PEP prescription, and 27% called during business hours and were directed to a clinic. Access to PEP within 72 hours of exposure occurred in 1,081 (93%) of eligible callers and within 36 hours in 68%. 90% of callers had confirmed follow-up clinic appointments. Of the 472 callers linked to care at the IAM, 89 (19%) transitioned to PrEP. Conclusion This unique program demonstrates a timely initiative to facilitate PEP access to a diverse cohort with the purpose of mitigating risk from potential exposure to HIV. Further investigation is needed to explore adherence to PEP, follow-up testing results, transitions to PrEP for prevention planning, and coordination of health care and substance use services. Disclosures E. Kaplan-Lewis, Viiv: Consultant, Consulting fee. J. Aberg, Gilead: Research Contractor, Research support. GSK: Research Contractor, Research support. ViiV: Research Contractor, Research support. A. Urbina, Theratechnologies: Scientific Advisor, Consulting fee. ViiV: Scientific Advisor, Consulting fee. Merck: Scientific Advisor, Consulting fee. Gilead: Scientific Advisor, Consulting fee.


Author(s):  
Stephanie Ngai ◽  
Zoe Edelstein ◽  
Julie Myers ◽  
Don Weiss

HIV post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) prescriptions are not uniformly monitored in the United States. We developed a method to identify PEP-related visits in New York City emergency departments (EDs). Using ED data, we observed a threefold increase in PEP-related visits to NYC EDs from 2002-2013. 73% of PEP-related visits were among males, and 45% among adults ages 25-34 years. Incorporation of this method of PEP monitoring in the NYC syndromic surveillance system will be used to observe trends and inform HIV outreach efforts.


AIDS Care ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 30 (1) ◽  
pp. 9-17 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew Garnett ◽  
Yael Hirsch-Moverman ◽  
Julie Franks ◽  
Eleanor Hayes-Larson ◽  
Wafaa M. El-Sadr ◽  
...  

2017 ◽  
Vol 20 (7) ◽  
pp. 772-786 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew Thomann ◽  
Ashley Grosso ◽  
Richard Zapata ◽  
Mary Ann Chiasson

Author(s):  
Lawrence Purpura ◽  
Jason Zucker ◽  
Elijah LaSota ◽  
Mabel Lopez ◽  
Rebecca Spicehandler ◽  
...  

Abstract Multiplex PCR testing for gastrointestinal pathogens was performed on a longitudinal cohort of 110 MSM taking HIV PrEP. At least one pathogen was detected among 50 (45%) participants, with some participants testing positive for the same pathogen on multiple consecutive visits over a period of months.


2019 ◽  
Vol 95 (8) ◽  
pp. 584-587 ◽  
Author(s):  
Étienne Meunier ◽  
Karolynn Siegel

ObjectivePrior studies have shown that men who have sex with men (MSM) who attend sex clubs or parties are at higher risk for HIV and other STIs than those who do not. We sought to provide data about MSM who attend sex clubs/parties in New York City (NYC) in the era of biomedical HIV prevention.Methods: We conducted an online survey among MSM in NYC (n=766) in 2016–2017 and investigated differences between those who reported never attending a sex club/party (non-attendees 50.1%), those who had attended over a year ago (past attendees 18.0%) and those who attended in the prior year (recent attendees 30.1%). We also conducted multivariable analyses to explore associations with past-year STI diagnosis.Results: Recent attendees were not more likely to be HIV positive than non-attendees. Among participants never diagnosed with HIV, recent attendees were more likely to use pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP, 32.6%) than non-attendees (14.5%) and past attendees (18.8%; p<0.001). Recent attendees reported the highest numbers of recent sex partners, including partners with whom they had condomless anal sex. Significantly more recent attendees reported an STI diagnosis in the prior year (27.9%) compared with non-attendees (14.0%) and past attendees (16.5%; p<0.001). However, 13.8% of non-attendees and 11.5% of past attendees reported having never tested for STIs, significantly more than recent attendees (6.0%, p=0.010). Multivariable analysis showed recent attendees to have 2.42 times the odds (compared with non-attendees) of reporting past-year STI diagnosis (95% CI 1.52 to 3.87, p<0.001).ConclusionsCompared with those who had not done so, MSM who attended sex clubs/parties in NYC in the prior year were not only more likely to report past-year STI diagnoses but also more likely to report PrEP use or recent HIV/STI testing. Sexual health promotion among MSM who attend sex clubs/parties should address STI risk and prevention.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document