Exploring pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) modality preferences among black cisgender women attending family planning clinics in Chicago via a cross-sectional mixed-methods study.

Amy K Johnson, Emily Ott, Eleanor E Friedman, Agustina Pandiani, Amy Moore, Isa Alvarez, Catherine Desmarais, Sadia Haider
Author Information
  1. Amy K Johnson: Ann and Robert H Lurie Children's Hospital of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA. ORCID
  2. Emily Ott: Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
  3. Eleanor E Friedman: Section of Infectious Diseases and Global Health, Department of Medicine, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
  4. Agustina Pandiani: University of Chicago Department of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
  5. Amy Moore: University of Chicago Department of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
  6. Isa Alvarez: Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
  7. Catherine Desmarais: Public Health Institute, Oakland, California, USA.
  8. Sadia Haider: Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, USA.

Abstract

Background: Despite pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) demonstrated effectiveness, black cisgender women continue to be at an elevated risk for HIV acquisition and uptake of daily oral PrEP is low in this population in the USA. As advancements in PrEP delivery options continue, it is important to understand women's acceptability of these additional options, specifically black cisgender women, in order to inform uptake and adherence among this population at increased need of HIV prevention options.
Setting: A cross-sectional survey among black cisgender women ages 13-45 (inclusive) attending women's health clinics in Chicago, Illinois, USA, prior to the approval of cabotegravir long-acting injectable.
Methods: Descriptive statistics were used to describe the sample and bivariate analysis was used to detect differences between categorical and outcome variables using �� test. Responses to open-ended questions were thematically coded to explore black cisgender women's attitudes and preferences between the three methods of PrEP delivery including vaginal ring, long-acting injectable and a combined method that would prevent both pregnancy and HIV.
Results: In total, 211 cisgender women and adolescents responded to the survey. Both injections and combination pills were popular among participants, with 64.5% and 67.3% expressing interest in these forms of PrEP, respectively. The least popular method was the vaginal ring option, with 75.4% of respondents indicating that they would not consider using this modality. Overall, responses were not statistically different between the two surveys administered (�� p values for injection PrEP method 0.66, combination PrEP method 0.93 and ring PrEP method 0.66) suggesting that the popularity of each method was not dependent on clinic location or the age of participants.
Conclusion: This research provides important insights into the preferences and attitudes of different PrEP modalities among black cisgender women. As different modalities continue to be approved for use among cisgender women, more research is needed to investigate the acceptability and preferences of these different modalities in order to improve uptake and adherence among this population.

Keywords

References

  1. Infect Dis Ther. 2017 Sep;6(3):363-382 [PMID: 28600755]
  2. Ann Intern Med. 2013 Jan 1;158(1):10-8 [PMID: 23277896]
  3. J Racial Ethn Health Disparities. 2020 Jun;7(3):550-554 [PMID: 31848943]
  4. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2024 Apr 1;95(4):370-376 [PMID: 38133586]
  5. Lancet HIV. 2016 Sep;3(9):e406-e408 [PMID: 27562739]
  6. AIDS Care. 2017 Jun;29(6):751-758 [PMID: 27680304]
  7. Adolesc Health Med Ther. 2017 Nov 29;8:137-148 [PMID: 29238237]
  8. Curr Opin HIV AIDS. 2015 Jul;10(4):271-7 [PMID: 26049953]
  9. AIDS Patient Care STDS. 2015 Feb;29(2):102-10 [PMID: 25513954]
  10. BMJ Open. 2024 Apr 22;14(4):e083837 [PMID: 38653510]
  11. Acad Pediatr. 2024 Sep-Oct;24(7):1110-1115 [PMID: 38631476]
  12. Front Reprod Health. 2022 Sep 30;4:671009 [PMID: 36303637]
  13. AIDS Behav. 2022 Nov;26(11):3469-3479 [PMID: 35445992]
  14. Drugs. 2015 Feb;75(3):243-51 [PMID: 25673022]
  15. AIDS Patient Care STDS. 2024 Apr;38(4):177-184 [PMID: 38656214]
  16. HIV AIDS (Auckl). 2015 Apr 28;7:125-36 [PMID: 25987851]
  17. Curr Opin HIV AIDS. 2016 Jan;11(1):87-93 [PMID: 26575146]
  18. AIDS Patient Care STDS. 2013 Apr;27(4):248-54 [PMID: 23565928]
  19. Curr Opin HIV AIDS. 2016 Jan;11(1):94-101 [PMID: 26633641]
  20. Clin Infect Dis. 2013 Jun;56(11):1604-12 [PMID: 23408681]
  21. AIDS Patient Care STDS. 2022 Nov;36(11):431-442 [PMID: 36367995]
  22. AIDS Behav. 2022 Jul;26(7):2212-2223 [PMID: 34985607]
  23. J Int AIDS Soc. 2016 Oct 18;19(7(Suppl 6)):21107 [PMID: 27760684]

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0PrEPcisgenderwomenamongblackmethodHIVpreferencesdifferentcontinueuptakepopulationoptionswomen'sring0modalitiespre-exposureprophylaxisUSAdeliveryimportantacceptabilityorderadherencecross-sectionalsurveyattendingclinicsChicagolong-actinginjectableusedusing��attitudesvaginalcombinationpopularparticipantsmodality66researchBackground:DespitedemonstratedeffectivenesselevatedriskacquisitiondailyorallowadvancementsunderstandadditionalspecificallyinformincreasedneedpreventionSetting:ages13-45inclusivehealthIllinoispriorapprovalcabotegravirMethods:DescriptivestatisticsdescribesamplebivariateanalysisdetectdifferencescategoricaloutcomevariablestestResponsesopen-endedquestionsthematicallycodedexplorethreemethodsincludingcombinedpreventpregnancyResults:total211adolescentsrespondedinjectionspills645%673%expressinginterestformsrespectivelyleastoption754%respondentsindicatingconsiderOverallresponsesstatisticallytwosurveysadministeredpvaluesinjection93suggestingpopularitydependentcliniclocationageConclusion:providesinsightsapproveduseneededinvestigateimproveExploringfamilyplanningviamixed-methodsstudyPre-ExposureProphylaxisPrimaryPrevention

Similar Articles

Cited By (1)