Trends of nonoccupational postexposure prophylaxis in the United States

被引:1
作者
McCormick, Carter D. [1 ,5 ]
Sullivan, Patrick S. [2 ]
Qato, Dima M. [3 ,4 ]
Crawford, Stephanie Y. [1 ]
Schumock, Glen T. [1 ]
Lee, Todd A. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Illinois, Coll Pharm, Dept Pharm Syst Outcomes & Policy, Chicago, IL USA
[2] Emory Univ, Rollins Sch Publ Hlth, Dept Epidemiol, Atlanta, GA USA
[3] Univ Southern Calif, Titus Family Dept Clin Pharm, Program Med & Publ Hlth, Sch Pharm, Los Angeles, CA USA
[4] Univ Southern Calif Angeles, USC Leonard D Schaeffer Ctr Hlth Policy & Econ, Los Angeles, CA USA
[5] UIC Coll Pharm, 833S Wood St, Chicago, IL 60612 USA
关键词
claims analysis; HIV; nonoccupational postexposure prophylaxis; postexposure prophylaxis; trend analysis; HIV PREEXPOSURE PROPHYLAXIS; TENOFOVIR DF; RISK; PREVENTION; HEALTH; BOSTON; PREP; PEP; EMTRICITABINE; PERSPECTIVES;
D O I
10.1097/QAD.0000000000003701
中图分类号
R392 [医学免疫学]; Q939.91 [免疫学];
学科分类号
100102 ;
摘要
Objective: To describe national annual rates of nonoccupational postexposure prophylaxis (nPEP) in the United States.Design: Retrospective cohort study of commercially insured individuals in the Merative MarketScan Database from January 1, 2010 to December 31, 2019.Methods: Patients at least 13 years old prescribed nPEP per recommended Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidelines were identified using pharmacy claims. Rates of use were described overall and stratified by sex, age group, and region. These rates were qualitatively compared to the diagnosis rates of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) observed in the data. Joinpoint analysis identified inflection points of nPEP use.Results: Eleven thousand, three hundred and ninety-seven nPEP users were identified, with a mean age of 33.7 years. Most were males (64.6%) and lived in the south (33.2%) and northeast (32.4%). The rate of nPEP use increased 515%, from 1.42 nPEP users per 100 000 enrollees in 2010 to 8.71 nPEP users per 10 000 enrollees in 2019. The comparative nPEP use rates among subgroups largely mirrored their HIV diagnosis rates, that is, subgroups with a higher HIV rate had higher nPEP use. In the Joinpoint analysis significant growth was observed from 2012 to 2015 [estimated annual percentage change (EAPC): 45.8%; 95% confidence interval (CI): 29.4 - 64.3] followed by a more moderate increase from 2015 to 2019 (EAPC 16.0%; 95% CI: 12.6-19.6).Conclusions: nPEP use increased from 2010 to 2019, but not equally across all risk groups. Further policy interventions should be developed to reduce barriers and ensure adequate access to this important HIV prevention tool.
引用
收藏
页码:2223 / 2232
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] HIV Nonoccupational Postexposure Prophylaxis Among Men Who Have Sex with Men: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Global Data
    Wang, Zhenyu
    Yuan, Tanwei
    Fan, Song
    Qian, Han-zhu
    Li, Peiyang
    Zhan, Yuewei
    Li, Hui
    Zou, Huachun
    AIDS PATIENT CARE AND STDS, 2020, 34 (05) : 193 - 204
  • [22] HIV Medical Providers' Perceptions of the Use of Antiretroviral Therapy as Nonoccupational Postexposure Prophylaxis in 2 Major Metropolitan Areas
    Rodriguez, Allan E.
    Castel, Amanda D.
    Parish, Carrigan L.
    Willis, Sarah
    Feaster, Daniel J.
    Kharfen, Michael
    Cardenas, Gabriel A.
    Villamizar, Kira
    Kolber, Michael
    Vazquez-Rivera, Liliana
    Metsch, Lisa R.
    JAIDS-JOURNAL OF ACQUIRED IMMUNE DEFICIENCY SYNDROMES, 2013, 64 : S68 - S79
  • [23] Cost-effectiveness of HIV postexposure prophylaxis following sexual or injection drug exposure in 96 metropolitan areas in the United States
    Pinkerton, SD
    Martin, JN
    Roland, ME
    Katz, MH
    Coates, T
    Kahn, JO
    AIDS, 2004, 18 (15) : 2065 - 2073
  • [24] HIV Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis and Postexposure Prophylaxis in Japan: Context of Use and Directions for Future Research and Action
    DiStefano, Anthony S.
    Takeda, Makiko
    AIDS PATIENT CARE AND STDS, 2017, 31 (02) : 60 - 77
  • [25] HIV preexposure prophylaxis and postexposure prophylaxis in women: a comprehensive guide for healthcare providers
    Vora, Niam
    Badowski, Melissa E.
    THERAPEUTIC ADVANCES IN INFECTIOUS DISEASE, 2024, 11
  • [26] Reimagining Preexposure Prophylaxis Provision for Women in the United States
    Seidman, Dominika
    Logan, Rachel
    Weber, Shannon
    Gandhi, Anisha
    Blackstock, Oni
    CLINICAL INFECTIOUS DISEASES, 2022, 74 (12) : 2243 - 2248
  • [27] Pediatric Considerations for Postexposure Human Immunodeficiency Virus Prophylaxis
    Muller, William J.
    Chadwick, Ellen G.
    INFECTIOUS DISEASE CLINICS OF NORTH AMERICA, 2018, 32 (01) : 91 - +
  • [28] Differentiating Nonoccupational Postexposure Prophylaxis Seroconverters and Non-Seroconverters in a Community-Based Clinic in Los Angeles, California
    Beymer, Matthew R.
    Weiss, Robert E.
    Bolan, Robert K.
    Kofron, Ryan M.
    Flynn, Risa P.
    Pieribone, David L.
    Kulkarni, Sonali P.
    Landovitz, Raphael J.
    OPEN FORUM INFECTIOUS DISEASES, 2017, 4 (02):
  • [29] Australian Gay Men Who Have Taken Nonoccupational Postexposure Prophylaxis for HIV Are in Need of Effective HIV Prevention Methods
    Zablotska, Iryna B.
    Prestage, Garrett
    Holt, Martin
    Poynten, Mary
    de Wit, John
    Guy, Rebecca
    Mao, Limin
    McAllister, John
    Grulich, Andrew E.
    JAIDS-JOURNAL OF ACQUIRED IMMUNE DEFICIENCY SYNDROMES, 2011, 58 (04) : 424 - 428
  • [30] Preexposure Prophylaxis in the United States: An Evolving HIV Prevention Opportunity
    Goldschmidt, Ronald H.
    CLINICAL INFECTIOUS DISEASES, 2017, 64 (02) : 150 - 151