Implementation of pre-exposure prophylaxis programme in Spain. Feasibility of four different delivery models

Infeccions pel VIH; Factors de risc mèdics; Profilaxi preexposicióInfecciones por VIH; Factores de riesgo médicos; Profilaxis preexposiciónHIV infections; Medical risk factors; Pre-exposure prophylaxisBackground Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is an effective and cost-effective strategy for HIV prevention. Spain carried out an implementation study in order to assess the feasibility of implementing PrEP programmes within its heterogeneous health system. Methods Observational longitudinal study conducted on four different types of health-care setting: a community centre (CC), a sexually transmitted infections clinic (STIC), a hospital-based HIV unit (HBHIVU) and a hospital-based STI unit (HBSTIU). We recruited gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men (GBSM) and transgender women at risk of HIV infections, gave them PrEP and monitored clinical, behavioural PrEP-related and satisfaction information for 52 weeks. We collected perceptions on PrEP implementation feasibility from health-care professionals participating in the study. Results A total of 321 participants were recruited, with 99.1% being GBMSM. Overall retention was 87.2% and it was highest at the CC (92.6%). Condom use decreased during the study period, while STIs did not increase consistently. The percentage of people who did not miss any doses of PrEP during the previous week remained at over 93%. No HIV seroconversions occurred. We observed overall decreases in GHB (32.5% to 21.8%), cocaine (27.5% to 21.4%), MDMA (25.7% to 14.3%), speed (11.4% to 5.7%) and mephedrone use (10.7% to 5.0%). The overall participant satisfaction with PrEP was 98.6%. Health-care professionals’ perceptions of PrEP feasibility were positive, except for the lack of personnel. Conclusions PrEP implementation is feasible in four types of health-care settings. Local specificities have to be taken into consideration while implementing PrEP.This study has been conducted with the resources from the National AIDS Programme ant those from the participating study centers. Gilead donated the drug administered in the study. Donors had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. Some authors are employed by BCN Checkpoint. BCN Checkpoint is a Community Centre run by an NGO. BCN Checkpoint did not play a role in the study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript and only provided financial support in the form of author PC. The specific roles of this author is articulated in the ‘author contributions’ section