INTRODUCTION: Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is effective in reducing HIV transmission among key populations. In India, where PrEP is not currently part of the national HIV program, little is known about PrEP awareness, willingness to use PrEP, and barriers to uptake among people who inject drugs (PWID) and men who have sex with men (MSM). METHODS: We used respondent-driven sampling to accrue PWID and MSM in 22 sites from August 2016 to May 2017. Participants were asked about awareness of PrEP, willingness to use PrEP (following a brief description) and reasons why they might not be willing to use PrEP. Participants were also queried on preferences for PrEP delivery modality (oral vs. injectable). Multi-level logistic regression models were used to determine participant correlates of willingness to use PrEP. Estimates were weighted for the sampling method. RESULTS: A total of 10,538 PWID and 8,621 MSM who self-reported being HIV-negative were included in the analysis. Only 6.1% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 5.9, 6.3) of PWID and 8.0% of MSM (95% CI: 7.7, 8.4) were aware of PrEP. However, willingness to use PrEP was substantially higher in both groups: 52.4% of PWID and 67.6% of MSM. Participants commonly cited a perceived low risk for acquiring HIV infection, being perceived by others as being HIV-positive, and side effects as reasons why they would be unwilling to use PrEP. Among PWID, sharing needles and hazardous alcohol use were associated with increased willingness to use PrEP. Among MSM, having a main male partner and injection drug use were associated with increased willingness to use PrEP. Preference for daily oral or monthly injectable PrEP was similar among MSM (39.6%% vs. 41.7%,), while PWID were more likely to prefer oral to injectable administration routes (56.3% vs. 31.1%). CONCLUSIONS: As India plans to roll-out of PrEP in the public sector, our multi-city survey of PWID and MSM highlights the need for key population-focused education campaigns about PrEP and self-assessment of risk.
INTRODUCTION: Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is effective in reducing HIV transmission among key populations. In India, where PrEP is not currently part of the national HIV program, little is known about PrEP awareness, willingness to use PrEP, and barriers to uptake among people who inject drugs (PWID) and men who have sex with men (MSM). METHODS: We used respondent-driven sampling to accrue PWID and MSM in 22 sites from August 2016 to May 2017. Participants were asked about awareness of PrEP, willingness to use PrEP (following a brief description) and reasons why they might not be willing to use PrEP. Participants were also queried on preferences for PrEP delivery modality (oral vs. injectable). Multi-level logistic regression models were used to determine participant correlates of willingness to use PrEP. Estimates were weighted for the sampling method. RESULTS: A total of 10,538 PWID and 8,621 MSM who self-reported being HIV-negative were included in the analysis. Only 6.1% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 5.9, 6.3) of PWID and 8.0% of MSM (95% CI: 7.7, 8.4) were aware of PrEP. However, willingness to use PrEP was substantially higher in both groups: 52.4% of PWID and 67.6% of MSM. Participants commonly cited a perceived low risk for acquiring HIV infection, being perceived by others as being HIV-positive, and side effects as reasons why they would be unwilling to use PrEP. Among PWID, sharing needles and hazardous alcohol use were associated with increased willingness to use PrEP. Among MSM, having a main male partner and injection drug use were associated with increased willingness to use PrEP. Preference for daily oral or monthly injectable PrEP was similar among MSM (39.6%% vs. 41.7%,), while PWID were more likely to prefer oral to injectable administration routes (56.3% vs. 31.1%). CONCLUSIONS: As India plans to roll-out of PrEP in the public sector, our multi-city survey of PWID and MSM highlights the need for key population-focused education campaigns about PrEP and self-assessment of risk.
Authors: Shruti H Mehta; Gregory M Lucas; Suniti Solomon; Aylur K Srikrishnan; Allison M McFall; Neeraj Dhingra; Paneerselvam Nandagopal; M Suresh Kumar; David D Celentano; Sunil S Solomon Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2015-08-06 Impact factor: 9.079
Authors: Richard G White; Avi J Hakim; Matthew J Salganik; Michael W Spiller; Lisa G Johnston; Ligia Kerr; Carl Kendall; Amy Drake; David Wilson; Kate Orroth; Matthias Egger; Wolfgang Hladik Journal: J Clin Epidemiol Date: 2015-05-01 Impact factor: 6.437
Authors: Sunil S Solomon; Gregory M Lucas; David D Celentano; Allison M McFall; Elizabeth Ogburn; Lawrence H Moulton; Aylur K Srikrishnan; M Suresh Kumar; Santhanam Anand; Suniti Solomon; Shruti H Mehta Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2016-11-14 Impact factor: 2.655
Authors: Lakshmi Ganapathi; Allison M McFall; Aylur K Srikrishnan; Muniratnam S Kumar; Santhanam Anand; Gregory M Lucas; Shruti H Mehta; Sion K Harris; Sunil S Solomon Journal: J Int AIDS Soc Date: 2019-05 Impact factor: 5.396
Authors: Danielle Guy; Jason Doran; Trenton M White; Lena van Selm; Teymur Noori; Jeffrey V Lazarus Journal: Front Psychiatry Date: 2022-08-26 Impact factor: 5.435