Avy A Skolnik1,2, Barbara G Bokhour3,4, Allen L Gifford5,6, Brigid M Wilson7, Puja Van Epps7,8. 1. Center for Healthcare Organization and Implementation Research (CHOIR), ENRM Veterans Affairs Medical Center Bedford, Bedford, MA, USA. askolnik@umass.edu. 2. University Health Services, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA, USA. askolnik@umass.edu. 3. Center for Healthcare Organization and Implementation Research (CHOIR), ENRM Veterans Affairs Medical Center Bedford, Bedford, MA, USA. 4. Department of Health Law, Policy, and Management, Boston University School of Public Health, 715 Albany Street, Boston, MA, 02118, USA. 5. Section of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, MA, USA. 6. Center for Healthcare Organization and Implementation Research (CHOIR), VA Boston Healthcare System, Boston, MA, USA. 7. Louis Stokes Cleveland Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center (LSCVAMC), Cleveland, OH, USA. 8. Department of Internal Medicine, Case Western School of Medicine, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) has been shown to be efficacious in preventing HIV; however, its uptake remains modest. Given that there are fewer cost barriers to receiving PrEP within VHA than via commercial insurance, VHA represents an ideal setting in which to study other barriers that may impact patients seeking PrEP. OBJECTIVE: We sought to understand potential barriers to obtaining PrEP within the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) through examination of documentation in electronic medical records. DESIGN: Retrospective structured chart review, including chart abstractions of notes, referrals, and communications; content analysis of charts from a subsample of patients receiving PrEP in VHA. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred sixty-one patients prescribed PrEP at 90 sites varying in PrEP prescribing rates. APPROACH: We extracted descriptive information and conducted a qualitative analysis of all PrEP-relevant free-text notes including who initiated the PrEP conversation (patient vs. provider), time interval between request and prescription, reasons for denying PrEP, and patient responses to barriers. KEY RESULTS: Patients initiated 94% of PrEP conversations and 35% of patients experienced delays receiving PrEP ranging from six weeks to 16 months. Over 70% of cases evidenced barriers to access. Barriers included provider knowledge gaps about PrEP, provider knowledge gaps about VHA systems related to PrEP, confusion or disagreement over clinic purview for PrEP, and provider attitudes or stigma associated with patients seeking PrEP. CONCLUSIONS: Although PrEP is recommended for HIV prevention in high-risk persons, many PrEP-eligible individuals faced barriers to obtaining a prescription. Current practices place substantial responsibility on patients to request and advocate for this service, in contrast to many other preventive services. Understanding the prevalence and content of PrEP knowledge gaps and attitudinal barriers can inform organizational interventions to increase PrEP access and decrease HIV transmission.
BACKGROUND: Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) has been shown to be efficacious in preventing HIV; however, its uptake remains modest. Given that there are fewer cost barriers to receiving PrEP within VHA than via commercial insurance, VHA represents an ideal setting in which to study other barriers that may impact patients seeking PrEP. OBJECTIVE: We sought to understand potential barriers to obtaining PrEP within the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) through examination of documentation in electronic medical records. DESIGN: Retrospective structured chart review, including chart abstractions of notes, referrals, and communications; content analysis of charts from a subsample of patients receiving PrEP in VHA. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred sixty-one patients prescribed PrEP at 90 sites varying in PrEP prescribing rates. APPROACH: We extracted descriptive information and conducted a qualitative analysis of all PrEP-relevant free-text notes including who initiated the PrEP conversation (patient vs. provider), time interval between request and prescription, reasons for denying PrEP, and patient responses to barriers. KEY RESULTS:Patients initiated 94% of PrEP conversations and 35% of patients experienced delays receiving PrEP ranging from six weeks to 16 months. Over 70% of cases evidenced barriers to access. Barriers included provider knowledge gaps about PrEP, provider knowledge gaps about VHA systems related to PrEP, confusion or disagreement over clinic purview for PrEP, and provider attitudes or stigma associated with patients seeking PrEP. CONCLUSIONS: Although PrEP is recommended for HIV prevention in high-risk persons, many PrEP-eligible individuals faced barriers to obtaining a prescription. Current practices place substantial responsibility on patients to request and advocate for this service, in contrast to many other preventive services. Understanding the prevalence and content of PrEP knowledge gaps and attitudinal barriers can inform organizational interventions to increase PrEP access and decrease HIV transmission.
Entities:
Keywords:
HIV/AIDS; patient-provider communication; pre-exposure prophylaxis; prevention; primary care
Authors: Robert M Grant; Javier R Lama; Peter L Anderson; Vanessa McMahan; Albert Y Liu; Lorena Vargas; Pedro Goicochea; Martín Casapía; Juan Vicente Guanira-Carranza; Maria E Ramirez-Cardich; Orlando Montoya-Herrera; Telmo Fernández; Valdilea G Veloso; Susan P Buchbinder; Suwat Chariyalertsak; Mauro Schechter; Linda-Gail Bekker; Kenneth H Mayer; Esper Georges Kallás; K Rivet Amico; Kathleen Mulligan; Lane R Bushman; Robert J Hance; Carmela Ganoza; Patricia Defechereux; Brian Postle; Furong Wang; J Jeff McConnell; Jia-Hua Zheng; Jeanny Lee; James F Rooney; Howard S Jaffe; Ana I Martinez; David N Burns; David V Glidden Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2010-11-23 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Robert M Grant; Peter L Anderson; Vanessa McMahan; Albert Liu; K Rivet Amico; Megha Mehrotra; Sybil Hosek; Carlos Mosquera; Martin Casapia; Orlando Montoya; Susan Buchbinder; Valdilea G Veloso; Kenneth Mayer; Suwat Chariyalertsak; Linda-Gail Bekker; Esper G Kallas; Mauro Schechter; Juan Guanira; Lane Bushman; David N Burns; James F Rooney; David V Glidden Journal: Lancet Infect Dis Date: 2014-07-22 Impact factor: 25.071
Authors: Christina J Sun; Kirsten M Anderson; David Bangsberg; Kim Toevs; Dayna Morrison; Caitlin Wells; Pete Clark; Christina Nicolaidis Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2019-02-04 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Jared M Baeten; Deborah Donnell; Patrick Ndase; Nelly R Mugo; James D Campbell; Jonathan Wangisi; Jordan W Tappero; Elizabeth A Bukusi; Craig R Cohen; Elly Katabira; Allan Ronald; Elioda Tumwesigye; Edwin Were; Kenneth H Fife; James Kiarie; Carey Farquhar; Grace John-Stewart; Aloysious Kakia; Josephine Odoyo; Akasiima Mucunguzi; Edith Nakku-Joloba; Rogers Twesigye; Kenneth Ngure; Cosmas Apaka; Harrison Tamooh; Fridah Gabona; Andrew Mujugira; Dana Panteleeff; Katherine K Thomas; Lara Kidoguchi; Meighan Krows; Jennifer Revall; Susan Morrison; Harald Haugen; Mira Emmanuel-Ogier; Lisa Ondrejcek; Robert W Coombs; Lisa Frenkel; Craig Hendrix; Namandjé N Bumpus; David Bangsberg; Jessica E Haberer; Wendy S Stevens; Jairam R Lingappa; Connie Celum Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2012-07-11 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Will Garner; Brigid M Wilson; Lauren Beste; Marissa Maier; Michael E Ohl; Puja Van Epps Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2018-11 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Douglas S Krakower; Matthew J Mimiaga; Joshua G Rosenberger; David S Novak; Jennifer A Mitty; Jaclyn M White; Kenneth H Mayer Journal: PLoS One Date: 2012-03-28 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Virginia A Fonner; Sarah L Dalglish; Caitlin E Kennedy; Rachel Baggaley; Kevin R O'Reilly; Florence M Koechlin; Michelle Rodolph; Ioannis Hodges-Mameletzis; Robert M Grant Journal: AIDS Date: 2016-07-31 Impact factor: 4.177
Authors: Gregory Phillips Ii; David J McCuskey; Dylan Felt; Anand B Raman; Christina S Hayford; Jim Pickett; Julia Shenkman; Peter T Lindeman; Brian Mustanski Journal: Soc Sci Med Date: 2020-11-04 Impact factor: 4.634
Authors: Sarah K Calabrese; Sharanya Rao; Adam I Eldahan; Mehrit Tekeste; Djordje Modrakovic; D Dangaran; Cheriko A Boone; Kristen Underhill; Douglas S Krakower; Kenneth H Mayer; Nathan B Hansen; Trace S Kershaw; Manya Magnus; Joseph R Betancourt; John F Dovidio Journal: Arch Sex Behav Date: 2022-07-05
Authors: Samuel R Bunting; Sarah S Garber; Robert H Goldstein; Timothy D Ritchie; Tamzin J Batteson; Timothy J Keyes Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2020-02-20 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Whitney C Sewell; Patricia Solleveld; Dominika Seidman; Christine Dehlendorf; Julia L Marcus; Douglas S Krakower Journal: Curr HIV/AIDS Rep Date: 2021-01-08 Impact factor: 5.071
Authors: Elizabeth Gregg; Carrie Linn; Emma Nace; Lillian Gelberg; Brianna Cowan; Jennifer A Fulcher Journal: J Prim Care Community Health Date: 2020 Jan-Dec
Authors: Ashley A Leech; Cindy L Christiansen; Benjamin P Linas; Donna M Jacobsen; Isabel Morin; Mari-Lynn Drainoni Journal: PLoS One Date: 2020-09-03 Impact factor: 3.752
Authors: Takaaki Kobayashi; Puja Van Epps; Marissa M Maier; Lauren A Beste; Brice F Beck; Bruce Alexander; Michael E Ohl Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2021-08-02 Impact factor: 6.473