Search

Background: Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) with emtricitabine/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate is efficacious in reducing HIV acquisition. For some gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (MSM), daily ongoing PrEP may be unsuitable for use as a long-term prevention strategy because of episodic risk, cost issues, or concerns about the biological consequences of medication. Setting: This study evaluated the feasibility of short-term, fixed-interval episodic PrEP (Epi-PrEP) for use among vacationing MSM. We describe the feasibility of implementing a clinic-based Epi-PrEP pilot program for 48 MSM who reported occasional condomless sex and anticipated a defined high-risk time. Methods: This was a nonrandomized naturalistic study of an observational clinical intervention. The primary outcome assessed was adherence, as measured by self-report and plasma tenofovir levels. Results: Of 54 MSM who enrolled in the study, 48 completed the 3-month visit. The majority (93.7%) had tenofovir concentrations consistent with daily use on returning from vacation. Almost 3/4 reported condomless sex during vacation, and about 1/3 reported recreational drug use. During the 3-month follow-up, 1 participant had become HIV-infected because of a lapse in continued access to the PrEP after study. Although adverse events were common, none were serious. More than 70% of participants indicated an interest in daily ongoing PrEP use. Conclusions: Epi-PrEP was well tolerated by at risk MSM in this study, with high levels of medication adherence. Many participants felt the experience of initiating PrEP while on vacation could be a means for transition to long-term PrEP use. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Research has shown that buprenorphine/naloxone (bup/nx) is a safe and effective treatment for opioid dependence. Few reports, however, describe the patient perspective on bup/nx treatment and its integration into HIV care settings.We conducted qualitative interviews with 33 patients to further investigate patient satisfaction and experience with bup/nx treatment and integrated care. Interviews focused on drug use/cessation history; attitudes toward and satisfaction with bup/nx treatment; and perspectives on integrated bup/nx treatment and HIV care.Patients were overwhelmingly satisfied with the pharmacologic effects and treatment outcomes of bup/nx, including effectiveness in blocking cravings and controlling opioid use; decreased fear of withdrawal and/or missing doses; and an overall improvement in quality of life. Patients also described being more engaged with both their substance abuse treatment and HIV care, including greater ability to manage their own treatment, keep, appointments, and adhere to antiretroviral medication regimes. Counseling was seen by some patients as an important component of bup/nx treatment. Nearly all were positive about their experience with integrated care, appreciative of an improved drug treatment environment, convenience, and quality of care.Findings suggest that patients report bup/nx to be a viable treatment and many prefer it to other opioid replacement therapies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Substance abuse is associated with poor medical and quality-of-life outcomes among HIV-infected individuals. Although drug treatment may reduce these negative consequences, for many patients, options are limited. Buprenorphine/naloxone, an opioid agonist treatment that can be prescribed in the United States in office-based settings, can be used to expand treatment capacity and integrate substance abuse services into HIV care. Recognizing this potential, the US Health Resources and Services Administration funded the development and implementation of demonstration projects that integrated HIV care and buprenorphine/naloxone treatment at 10 sites across the country. An Evaluation and Technical Assistance Center provided programmatic and clinical support as well as oversight for an evaluation that examined the processes for and outcomes of integrated care. The evaluation included patient-level self-report and chart abstractions as well as provider and site level data collected through surveys and in-depth interviews. Although multisite demonstrations pose implementation and evaluation challenges, our experience demonstrates that these can, in part, be addressed through ongoing communication and technical assistance as well as a comprehensive evaluation design that incorporates multiple research methods and data sources. Although limitations to evaluation findings persist, they may be balanced by the scope and “real-world” context of the initiative. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]