학술논문

Perceived Versus Calculated HIV Risk: Implications for Pre-exposure Prophylaxis Uptake in a Randomized Trial of Men Who Have Sex With Men.
Document Type
article
Source
Journal of acquired immune deficiency syndromes (1999). 80(2)
Subject
Humans
HIV Infections
Anti-HIV Agents
Health Knowledge
Attitudes
Practice
Risk-Taking
Sexual Behavior
Homosexuality
Male
Adult
Patient Acceptance of Health Care
United States
Male
Medication Adherence
Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis
Pediatric AIDS
Pediatric
HIV/AIDS
Behavioral and Social Science
Prevention
Clinical Research
Clinical Trials and Supportive Activities
Mental Health
Infectious Diseases
Sexual and Gender Minorities (SGM/LGBT*)
Infection
Good Health and Well Being
pre-exposure prophylaxis
HIV risk perception
men who have sex with men
Clinical Sciences
Public Health and Health Services
Virology
Language
Abstract
BackgroundInaccurate HIV risk perception by men who have sex with men is a barrier to HIV prevention. Providing information about objective HIV risk could improve pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) uptake.MethodsPrEP Accessibility Research & Evaluation 2 (PrEPARE2) was a randomized controlled trial of men who have sex with men to determine whether an objective risk score affects future PrEP uptake. Participants completed a baseline survey to assess demographics, risk behaviors, and HIV self-perceived risk (SPR). The survey generated a calculated HIV risk (CalcR) score, estimating HIV risk based on reported condomless anal intercourse and sexually transmitted infections, and was provided to individuals in the intervention arm. Participants were contacted 8 weeks later to determine whether they initiated PrEP.ResultsOf 171 participants (median age 32 years; 37% Hispanic or non-Hispanic Black; median 5 sexual partners in the past 6 months), 81% had heard of PrEP, and 57% believed they were good PrEP candidates. SPR had poor agreement with CalcR (kappa = 0.176) with 38% underestimating their HIV risk. At week 8, only 14 of 135 participants had initiated PrEP with no difference between arms (CalcR 11%, control 10%, P > 0.99). The most common reason for not starting PrEP was low HIV risk perception. There was a relative decrease in SPR over time (P = 0.06) but no difference between arms (P = 0.29).ConclusionProviding an objective HIV risk score alone did not increase PrEP uptake. HIV testing performed at testing sites may be a crucial time to correct misperceptions about risk and initiate same-day PrEP, given enthusiasm for PrEP on the testing day to facilitate greater uptake.