Samuel R Bunting1, Sarah S Garber2, Robert H Goldstein3, Timothy D Ritchie4, Tamzin J Batteson5, Timothy J Keyes6. 1. Chicago Medical School, Rosalind Franklin University of Medicine and Science, North Chicago, IL, USA. Samuel.Bunting@my.rfums.org. 2. Pharmaceutical Sciences, College of Pharmacy, Rosalind Franklin University of Medicine and Science, North Chicago, IL, USA. 3. Division of Infectious Disease, Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA. 4. Department of Psychology, Saint Xavier University, Chicago, IL, USA. 5. DeWitt C. Baldwin Institute for Interprofessional Education, Rosalind Franklin University of Medicine and Science, North Chicago, IL, USA. 6. Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Daily, oral pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is an effective and safe prevention strategy for people at risk for HIV. However, prescription of PrEP has been limited for patients at the highest risk. Disparities in PrEP prescription are pronounced among racial and gender minority patients. A significant body of literature indicates that practicing healthcare providers have little awareness and knowledge of PrEP. Very little work has investigated the education about PrEP among health professionals in training. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to compare health professions students' awareness of PrEP and education about PrEP between regions of the US, and to determine if correlations between regional HIV incidence and PrEP use were present. DESIGN: Survey study. PARTICIPANTS: A cross-sectional sample of health professions students (N = 1859) representing future prescribers (MD, DO, PA), pharmacists, and nurses in the US. KEY RESULTS: Overall, 83.4% of students were aware of PrEP, but only 62.2% of fourth-year students indicated they had been taught about PrEP at any time during their training. Education about PrEP was most comprehensive in the Northeastern US, the area with the highest PrEP to need ratio (4.7). In all regions, transgender patients and heterosexual men and women were least likely to be presented in education as PrEP candidates, and men who have sex with men were the most frequently presented. CONCLUSIONS: There are marked differences in education regarding PrEP both between academic programs and regions of the USA.
BACKGROUND: Daily, oral pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is an effective and safe prevention strategy for people at risk for HIV. However, prescription of PrEP has been limited for patients at the highest risk. Disparities in PrEP prescription are pronounced among racial and gender minority patients. A significant body of literature indicates that practicing healthcare providers have little awareness and knowledge of PrEP. Very little work has investigated the education about PrEP among health professionals in training. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to compare health professions students' awareness of PrEP and education about PrEP between regions of the US, and to determine if correlations between regional HIV incidence and PrEP use were present. DESIGN: Survey study. PARTICIPANTS: A cross-sectional sample of health professions students (N = 1859) representing future prescribers (MD, DO, PA), pharmacists, and nurses in the US. KEY RESULTS: Overall, 83.4% of students were aware of PrEP, but only 62.2% of fourth-year students indicated they had been taught about PrEP at any time during their training. Education about PrEP was most comprehensive in the Northeastern US, the area with the highest PrEP to need ratio (4.7). In all regions, transgender patients and heterosexual men and women were least likely to be presented in education as PrEP candidates, and men who have sex with men were the most frequently presented. CONCLUSIONS: There are marked differences in education regarding PrEP both between academic programs and regions of the USA.
Entities:
Keywords:
HIV; Health professions education; Pre-exposure prophylaxis; Students
Authors: Jeffrey S Becasen; Christa L Denard; Mary M Mullins; Darrel H Higa; Theresa Ann Sipe Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2018-11-29 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Aaron J Siegler; Farah Mouhanna; Robertino Mera Giler; Kevin Weiss; Elizabeth Pembleton; Jodie Guest; Jeb Jones; Amanda Castel; Howa Yeung; Michael Kramer; Scott McCallister; Patrick S Sullivan Journal: Ann Epidemiol Date: 2018-06-15 Impact factor: 3.797
Authors: Juno Obedin-Maliver; Elizabeth S Goldsmith; Leslie Stewart; William White; Eric Tran; Stephanie Brenman; Maggie Wells; David M Fetterman; Gabriel Garcia; Mitchell R Lunn Journal: JAMA Date: 2011-09-07 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Gina M Wingood; Kristin Dunkle; Christina Camp; Shilpa Patel; Julia E Painter; Anna Rubtsova; Ralph J DiClemente Journal: J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr Date: 2013-06-01 Impact factor: 3.731
Authors: Sheena McCormack; David T Dunn; Monica Desai; David I Dolling; Mitzy Gafos; Richard Gilson; Ann K Sullivan; Amanda Clarke; Iain Reeves; Gabriel Schembri; Nicola Mackie; Christine Bowman; Charles J Lacey; Vanessa Apea; Michael Brady; Julie Fox; Stephen Taylor; Simone Antonucci; Saye H Khoo; James Rooney; Anthony Nardone; Martin Fisher; Alan McOwan; Andrew N Phillips; Anne M Johnson; Brian Gazzard; Owen N Gill Journal: Lancet Date: 2015-09-09 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Samuel R Bunting; Brian A Feinstein; Sarah K Calabrese; Aniruddha Hazra; Neeral K Sheth; Alex F Chen; Sarah S Garber Journal: PLoS One Date: 2022-07-01 Impact factor: 3.752