So although people living with HIV will eventually move onto trea

So although people living with HIV will eventually move onto treatment, perhaps after 5 to even 10 years, this would mean starting treatment considerably earlier. Have you heard of TasP before? What do you think of TasP as a prevention http://www.selleckchem.com/products/crenolanib-cp-868596.html method? Can you imagine using this as a prevention method with a sexual partner who is HIV positive? How would you feel if a sexual partner suggested this as an HIV prevention method? Do you have any concerns about this as a prevention method? How do you think other people who are HIV negative

or untested might feel about using ARVs or HIV treatment as a prevention method? PrEP was explained to participants by drawing on but not limited to the use of a visual aid (figure 1). Basic explanations of PrEP were consistent across all FG and IDI discussions (box 2, section 4a). Subsequent and more detailed descriptions of PrEP varied depending on participant questions, which were encouraged and answered. This approach was taken to identify how PrEP should be described to potential candidates. Material did not

specify an exact efficacy rate due to the emerging clinical data, variability according to adherence, and to not overly complicate the explanation. Participants were informed that PrEP efficacy was dependent on levels of adherence, as demonstrated in a number of trials. FG participants were told that the iPrEx study reported approximately 73% protection if taken regularly (90% adherence), which was accurate at the time discussions were conducted.15 IDI participants were informed that efficacy could be up to or more than 90% if taken regularly, drawing on subsequent

sub-analyses of clinical findings.2 Participants were informed that other forms of risk reduction were recommended, such as condoms.16 Efficacy of condoms was described as less than 100%.17 18 Discussions explored a wide-range of PrEP scenarios, including non-condom use. Figure 1 Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) Visual Aid. ARVs, antiretrovirals. Written consent was provided by all participants at the start of the FGs and IDIs. All FGs and IDIs were digitally recorded and transcribed verbatim. Transcripts were anonymised and GSK-3 coded in NVivo V.10. Data were analysed thematically, drawing on anticipated as well as emergent themes.19–21 Rigour throughout the analysis was achieved through an iterative process of discussion and revision between coauthors.19 20 22 Results We identified five potential barriers to effective PrEP use: interpreting effectiveness; managing adherence; PrEP candidacy and low perceptions of HIV risk; concerns with other risks such as the criminalisation of HIV transmission and sexually transmitted infections (STIs); and moral barriers. We have identified extracts taken from FGs; otherwise, it can be assumed that the extract comes from an IDI participant. Interpreting effectiveness Understandings of PrEP effectiveness emerged as an important barrier to potential and effective use.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>