| Literature DB >> 35614366 |
Kimberly N Evans1, Rashida Hassan2, Ashley Townes2,3, Kate Buchacz2, Dawn K Smith2.
Abstract
Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is highly effective in preventing new HIV infection, but uptake remains challenging among Black and Hispanic/Latino persons. The purpose of this review was to understand how studies have used electronic telecommunication technology to increase awareness, uptake, adherence, and persistence in PrEP care among Black and Hispanic/Latino persons and how it can reduce social and structural barriers that contribute to disparities in HIV infection. Of the 1114 articles identified, 10 studies were eligible. Forty percent (40%) of studies focused on Black or Hispanic/Latino persons and 80% addressed social and structural barriers related to PrEP use such as navigation or access to PrEP. Mobile health designs were more commonly used (50%) compared to telehealth (30%) and e-health (20%) designs. There is a need to increase the development of telecommunications interventions that address the needs of Black and Hispanic/Latino persons often challenged with uptake and adherent use of PrEP.Entities:
Keywords: Disparities; HIV; PrEP; Telehealth; mHealth
Year: 2022 PMID: 35614366 PMCID: PMC9131988 DOI: 10.1007/s10461-022-03715-4
Source DB: PubMed Journal: AIDS Behav ISSN: 1090-7165
Fig. 1Selection of study articles for systematic review: telecommunication technology interventional studies focusing on PrEP awareness, uptake, adherence, and persistence in care
Summary of findings: interventional U.S. studies using technology to increase PrEP awareness, uptake, adherence, and persistence in care
| Primary study modality | First author and publication year | Study focus: patient awareness/acceptability, uptake, adherence, or persistence in PrEP | Study population location/ geographic location of study: urban or rural | Study sample size and race/ethnicities (e.g., Black/African American, Hispanic/Latino) enrolled | Sex/gender identity/sexual orientation—cisgender women, cisgender men, transgender women | HIV transmission risk factor/risky behavior targeted (i.e., MSM, PWID, Heterosexual) | Age group—youth, young adults, only adults, all age groups, | Social and structural barriers discussed or addressed during study | Summary of study/findings |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| E-Health Platform | Bond et al. (2016) [ | Patient Awareness/Acceptability of PrEP | Unknown | N = 119 Black/African American = 119 (100%) | Female | Heterosexual | Adults: ≥ 18 years | Stigma; burden of use; long-term use | Study used pre-recorded e-health videos to deliver the intervention. Found 53.9% of women perceived only advantages to using PrEP; 16.4% reported both advantages and disadvantages to using PrEP; 18.7% reported only disadvantages to using PrEP |
| Chandler et al. (2020) [ | Patient Awareness/Acceptability of PrEP | Urban | N = 43 Black/African American = 43 (100%) | Cisgender Women, Bisexual female | Heterosexual | Young Adults: 18–24 years old | PrEP cost; insurance status and type; provider unawareness or unwillingness to prescribe PrEP | Investigators used an e-learning online platform vs. in-person comparison group to deliver the intervention. Among Black women in college, 67% were unaware of PrEP and 72% were apprehensive about initiating PrEP. Results post-intervention found the in-person group had higher scores in learning about PrEP and were likely to use PrEP in the future (72.0%) compared to the online group (62.6%) | |
| Telehealth | Hoth et al. (2019) [ | Uptake of PrEP, Persistence in PrEP care | Urban Rural | N = 127 White = 103 (81%); Black = 9 (7%); Hispanic/Latinx = 7 (6%); Asian = 2 (3%); Multiracial = 2 (2%); Native American = 1 (1%) | Cisgender Men, Cisgender Women, Gender Fluid/nonbinary | MSM; Heterosexual | Adults: ≥ 18 years | Insurance status and type; PrEP cost | Investigators used live videoconferencing with physicians to prescribe PrEP. Of the 127 participants who completed an initial visit, 91% started PrEP within 7 days. The median number of follow-up days after starting PrEP was 214 days (range 3–609 days). Among participants starting PrEP, retention was 60% at 180 days |
| Refugio et al. (2019) [ | Uptake of PrEP; Adherence of PrEP | Urban | N = 25 Hispanic = 10 (40%); Asian = 8 (32%); White = 4 (16%); Black = 2 (8%); Middle Eastern = 1 (4%) | Cisgender Men | MSM | Young Adults: 18–25 years and older | Access to PrEP home-delivered; transportation; stigma; privacy; health care access to providers; insurance status and type; provider unawares or wiliness to prescribe | Intervention used telehealth visits via telephone to prescribe PrEP. The median time to PrEP initiation was 46 days. Majority of participants (≥ 85%) agreed that PrEPTECH is a better way to receive PrEP at 90 and 180 days. 100% of participants reported that PrEPTECH was very or extremely fast and convenient compared with other forms of getting on PrEP and would continue to use PrEPTECH even if the services were not free | |
| Stekler et al. (2018) [ | Uptake of PrEP, Adherence to PrEP | Urban | N = 48 White = 18 (37.5%); Asian = 4 (8.3%); Hispanic = 14 (29.2%); Black = 3 (6.3%); Other/multiracial = 9 (18.7) | Cisgender Men, Transgender Women | MSM | Not specified: 19–46 years old enrolled | Insurance status and type; access to technology; PrEP cost | Intervention used live videoconferencing with a provider to improve PrEP uptake and adherence. Compared with standard-of-care group participants, there were no significant differences in proportions of telehealth participants prescribed PrEP (70% vs. 79%), who attended the first follow-up visit (83% vs. 85%), or adherence at 1-month | |
| mHealth | Fuchs et al. (2018) [ | Adherence to PrEP | Urban | N = 56 Hispanic = 6 (10.7%); White = 38 (67.9%), Black = 7 (12.5%); Other = 5 (8.9%) | Cisgender men | MSM | Not specified: age summarized as ≤ 30 years old or > 30 years old | No | Intervention used a smartphone mobile app. Mean number of days when medication was not taken was reduced by 50% (95% CI 16–71; p = 0.008), and when comparing missed doses to specific visits before and after iText intervention, the proportion of missed doses was reduced by 77% (95% CI 33–92; p = 0.007) |
| Liu et al. (2018) [ | Adherence to PrEP; Persistence in PrEP | Urban | N = 121 Hispanic/Latino = 43 (36%); Black = 33, (27%;); White = 30 (25%); Asian = 8 (7%); Other = 5 (4%) | Cisgender men, transgender women | MSM | Young adults: 18–29 years old | Access to PrEP | Intervention was delivered with a smartphone mobile app via text messages. Participants who received PrEPmate were more likely to have PrEP levels consistent with ≥ 4 doses/week (72% PrEPmate vs. 57% standard-of-care, SOC) (OR 2.05, 95% CI 1.06–3.94, p = 0.03). For retention, greater percentage of visits were completed by PrEPmate (86%) vs. SOC participants (71%) (OR 2.62; 95% CI 1.24–5.54, p = 0.01) | |
| Liu et al. (2020) [ | Adherence to PrEP | Urban | N = 20 Black = 15 (75%) Latino = 5 (25%) | Cisgender Men | MSM | Young Adults: 18–35 years old | Access to PrEP during study and access/navigation to PrEP after study | Use of the directly observed therapy (DOT) app and diary was high, with median PrEP adherence of 91%. Most (84%) participants reported the app helped with PrEP adherence | |
| Mitchell et al. (2018) [ | Adherence to PrEP | Unknown | N = 10 White = 7 (70%); Asian = 2 (20%); Multiracial = 1 (10%) | Cisgender Men | MSM | Young adults: 18–30 years old | PrEP cost; family/partner/friend objection; health care access to providers | PrEP adherence increased 30% for participants who used the mobile app. For participants who did not indicate any change, PrEP adherence scores were already at a level considered efficacious (i.e., ≥ 4 doses per week) at baseline. 30% reported a decrease in barriers. Participants self-reported mean PrEP adherence rates of 91% through daily entries in the mSMART app | |
| Moore et al. (2017) [ | Adherence to PrEP | Urban | N = 398 Asian = 12 (6.2%); Black = 52 (13.1%); White = 295 (74.1%); Multiple = 24 (6.0%); Other = 7 (1.8%) Hispanic Ethnicity = 119 (29.9%) | Cisgender men, transgender women | MSM | Adults: ≥ 18 years | No | The text messaging intervention did not significantly improve adequate adherence (≥ 719 fmol/punch) compared to the SOC (72.0% vs 69.2%; p = 0.58), but did improve near-perfect adherence (≥ 1246 fmol/ punch) a secondary outcome, through week 48 (33.5% vs 24.8%, p = 0.06) • Blumenthal et al. (2019) [ • Blumenthal et al. (2019) [ • Hoenigl et al. (2018) [ • Pasipanodya et al. (2018) [ |