Improving HIV Pre Exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) uptake and initiation: process evaluation and recommendation development from a national PrEP programme

HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is key to HIV transmission elimination but implementation is challenging and under-researched. We undertook a process evaluation of the first 2years of a national PrEP program to explore barriers and facilitators to implementation and to develop recommendations to improve implementation, focusing on PrEP uptake and initiation. Stage 1 involved semi-structured telephone interviews and focus groups (September 2018-July 2019) with geographically and demographically diverse patients seeking/using/declining/stopping PrEP (n =39), sexual healthcare professionals (n =54), community-based organisation service users (n =9) and staff (n =15) across Scotland. We used deductive thematic analysis, to derive and then map key barriers and facilitators to priority areas that experts agreed would enhance uptake and initiation. In Stage 2, we used analytic tools from implementation science to systematically generate evidence-based, theoretically-informed recommendations to enhance uptake and initiation of PrEP. Barriers and facilitators were multi-levelled and interdependent. Barriers included the rapid pace of implementation without additional resource, and a lack of familiarity with PrEP prescribing. Facilitators included opportunities for acquisition of practice-based knowledge and normalisation of initiation activities. We refined our 68 'long-list' recommendations to 41 using expert input and the APEASE (Acceptability, Practicability, Effectiveness, Affordability, Side-effects, and Equity) criteria. Examples include: provision of PrEP in diverse settings to reach all in need; co-produced, culturally sensitive training resources for healthcare professionals, with focused content on non-daily dosing; meaningful collaborative working across all stakeholders. These evidence-based, theory informed recommendations provide a robust framework for optimising PrEP uptake and initiation in diverse settings to ensure PrEP reaches all who may benefit

Improving HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) uptake and initiation: process evaluation and recommendation development from a national PrEP program

BACKGROUND: HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is key to HIV transmission elimination but implementation is challenging and under-researched. We undertook a process evaluation of the first 2 years of a national PrEP program to explore barriers and facilitators to implementation and to develop recommendations to improve implementation, focusing on PrEP uptake and initiation. METHODS: Stage 1 involved semi-structured telephone interviews and focus groups (September 2018–July 2019) with geographically and demographically diverse patients seeking/using/declining/stopping PrEP (n = 39), sexual healthcare professionals (n = 54), community-based organisation service users (n = 9) and staff (n = 15) across Scotland. We used deductive thematic analysis, to derive and then map key barriers and facilitators to priority areas that experts agreed would enhance uptake and initiation. In Stage 2, we used analytic tools from implementation science to systematically generate evidence-based, theoretically-informed recommendations to enhance uptake and initiation of PrEP. RESULTS: Barriers and facilitators were multi-levelled and interdependent. Barriers included the rapid pace of implementation without additional resource, and a lack of familiarity with PrEP prescribing. Facilitators included opportunities for acquisition of practice-based knowledge and normalisation of initiation activities. We refined our 68 ‘long-list’ recommendations to 41 using expert input and the APEASE (Acceptability, Practicability, Effectiveness, Affordability, Side-effects, and Equity) criteria. Examples include: provision of PrEP in diverse settings to reach all in need; co-produced, culturally sensitive training resources for healthcare professionals, with focused content on non-daily dosing; meaningful collaborative working across all stakeholders. CONCLUSIONS: These evidence-based, theory informed recommendations provide a robust framework for optimising PrEP uptake and initiation in diverse settings to ensure PrEP reaches all who may benefit

Improving HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) adherence and retention in care: Process evaluation and recommendation development from a nationally implemented PrEP programme.

IntroductionHIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP), in which people take HIV medication to prevent HIV acquisition, underpins global HIV transmission elimination strategies. Effective prevention needs people to adhere to PrEP and remain in care during periods of risk, but this is difficult to achieve. We undertook a process evaluation of Scotland's PrEP programme to explore barriers and facilitators to PrEP adherence and retention in care and to systematically develop evidence-based, theoretically-informed recommendations to address them.MethodsWe conducted semi-structured interviews and focus groups (09/2018-07/2019) with patients who identified as gay or bisexual men and were either using PrEP, had declined the offer of PrEP, had stopped PrEP, or had been assessed as ineligible for PrEP (n = 39 of whom n = 5 (13%) identified as trans, median age 31 years and interquartile range 14 years), healthcare professionals involved in PrEP provision (n = 54 including specialist sexual health doctors and nurses of various grades, PrEP prescribing general practitioners, health promotion officers, midwifes, and a PrEP clinical secretary), and clients (n = 9) and staff (n = 15) of non-governmental organisations with an HIV prevention remit across Scotland. We used thematic analysis to map key barriers and facilitators to priority areas that could enhance adherence and retention in care. We used implementation science analytic tools (Theoretical Domains Framework, Intervention Functions, Behaviour Change Technique Taxonomy, APEASE criteria) and expert opinion to systematically generate recommendations.ResultsBarriers included perceived complexity of on-demand dosing, tendency for users to stop PrEP before seeking professional support, troublesome side-effects, limited flexibility in the settings/timings/nature of review appointments, PrEP-related stigma and emerging stigmas around not using PrEP. Facilitators included flexible appointment scheduling, reminders, and processes to follow up non-attenders. Examples of the 25 recommendations include: emphasising benefits of PrEP reviews and providing appointments flexibly within individualised PrEP care; using clinic systems to remind/recall PrEP users; supporting PrEP conversations among sexual partners; clear on-demand dosing guidance; encouraging good PrEP citizenship; detailed discussion on managing side-effects and care/coping planning activities.ConclusionsPrEP adherence and retention in care is challenging, reducing the effectiveness of PrEP at individual and population levels. We identify and provide solutions to where and how collaborative interventions across public health, clinical, and community practice could address these challenges