Family medicine · 2022
Assessing HIV Preexposure Prophylaxis Education in a Family Medicine Residency.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Aurora John A, Ballard Stephanie L, Salter Cynthia L, Skinker Ben
Аннотация
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: HIV preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) has been purposefully incorporated into our family medicine resident training within existing didactic lectures, readings, and routine office visit precepting. This mixed-methods evaluation assesses training strategies for PrEP use via survey and drug use evaluation (DUE).
METHODS: We surveyed 80 current and former family medicine residents (2014-2018) about their exposure to training components, self-reported confidence and competency in PrEP use, and practice behaviors reflecting CDC guidelines for patient eligibility and testing. In addition, we conducted a DUE of patients receiving PrEP from 2012-2018 for adherence to CDC guidelines. We report results with descriptive statistics, with χ2 analysis for group comparisons.
RESULTS: Survey response rate was 56.3%. Among respondents, 46.7% have prescribed PrEP and 55.5% self-assessed as competent to prescribe PrEP, with the majority (84%) rating precepting as most effective for building competence. Those self-assessed as competent were more likely to endorse practice behaviors reflecting CDC guidelines for monitoring PrEP (P<.05). DUE identified 68 patients; 98.5% men who have sex with men. No women with recent sexually transmitted infections, nor persons who inject drugs (PWID) received PrEP. Initial testing completion ranged from 79.4% (HIV) to 54.4% (hepatitis B). Follow-up testing completion ranged from 41.5% (HIV) to 26.4% (syphilis).
CONCLUSIONS: Residents rated precepting as the most effective training. However, DUE demonstrated that PrEP underuse, as well as suboptimal testing, limited experiential training on CDC guidelines. Curricular updates should further emphasize appropriate patient selection for PrEP, including women, minorities, and PWID, as well as robust testing, to continue expanding PrEP access.
METHODS: We surveyed 80 current and former family medicine residents (2014-2018) about their exposure to training components, self-reported confidence and competency in PrEP use, and practice behaviors reflecting CDC guidelines for patient eligibility and testing. In addition, we conducted a DUE of patients receiving PrEP from 2012-2018 for adherence to CDC guidelines. We report results with descriptive statistics, with χ2 analysis for group comparisons.
RESULTS: Survey response rate was 56.3%. Among respondents, 46.7% have prescribed PrEP and 55.5% self-assessed as competent to prescribe PrEP, with the majority (84%) rating precepting as most effective for building competence. Those self-assessed as competent were more likely to endorse practice behaviors reflecting CDC guidelines for monitoring PrEP (P<.05). DUE identified 68 patients; 98.5% men who have sex with men. No women with recent sexually transmitted infections, nor persons who inject drugs (PWID) received PrEP. Initial testing completion ranged from 79.4% (HIV) to 54.4% (hepatitis B). Follow-up testing completion ranged from 41.5% (HIV) to 26.4% (syphilis).
CONCLUSIONS: Residents rated precepting as the most effective training. However, DUE demonstrated that PrEP underuse, as well as suboptimal testing, limited experiential training on CDC guidelines. Curricular updates should further emphasize appropriate patient selection for PrEP, including women, minorities, and PWID, as well as robust testing, to continue expanding PrEP access.