Cargando…

2498. Perceptions of Injectable Antiretrovirals in an Urban HIV Clinic

BACKGROUND: Although new injectable antiretrovirals (ARV) for HIV may soon be available, there is little research on patient preferences. We examined perceptions of injectable ARV among persons living with HIV (PLWH). METHODS: This cross-sectional study was conducted among PLWH presenting for an app...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Koren, David E, Fedkiv, Volodymyra, Zhao, Huaqing, Bettiker, Robert, Tedaldi, Ellen, Samuel, Rafik
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6810640/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofz360.2176
_version_ 1783462300351463424
author Koren, David E
Fedkiv, Volodymyra
Zhao, Huaqing
Bettiker, Robert
Tedaldi, Ellen
Samuel, Rafik
author_facet Koren, David E
Fedkiv, Volodymyra
Zhao, Huaqing
Bettiker, Robert
Tedaldi, Ellen
Samuel, Rafik
author_sort Koren, David E
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Although new injectable antiretrovirals (ARV) for HIV may soon be available, there is little research on patient preferences. We examined perceptions of injectable ARV among persons living with HIV (PLWH). METHODS: This cross-sectional study was conducted among PLWH presenting for an appointment at TempleHealth in Philadelphia, PA between March 11 and April 18, 2019. Respondents completed a self-administered survey comprising 29 questions about socio-demographic data, current ARV, and preferences regarding injectable ARV therapies. Responses were recorded on a 10-point Likert scale, on which responses in the 1–5 range were defined as unlikely and 6–10 range as likely to choose injectable ARV. The primary endpoint was to describe factors associated with likely vs. unlikely uptake of injectable ARV. Responses between groups were compared with Chi-square or Wilcoxon rank-sum tests. RESULTS: 171 patients completed a survey with a 56% response rate. Demographics were 60% male, 70% African American, 33% LGBQ-identifying, 2% transgender, with a mean age of 48 ± 13 years. Percentages of likely uptake (55%, n = 94) and unlikely uptake (45%, n = 77) were similar. Median likelihood was 7 (IQR 7–10) and varied from likely (10, IQR 8–10) and unlikely (1, IQR 1–5) cohorts. There were no differences in overall likelihood based on current number of pills or pill frequency (P > 0.05). A likelihood trend was found among patients who missed one or more doses per week, however current adherence was not significant (p = 0.06). Likelihood of uptake means increased as the frequency of administration decreased: 1-week (5.7 ± 3.7), 2-week (5.9 ± 3.7), 1-month (7.3 ± 3.5), 2-month (7.3 ± 3.6), and 3-month (7.7 ± 3.4). Likelihood of uptake decreased as duration of a potential injection site reaction increased: 1 day (6.2 ± 3.5), 2–3 days (4.6 ± 3.3), 4–6 days (3.6 ± 3.1), 7 days or longer (3.0 ± 3.2). Respondents preferred their doctor’s office (60%) over self-injection (23%), assisted injection at home (11%), pharmacy (4%), or special injection center (2%) for administration setting. CONCLUSION: Our study indicates that availability of injectable administration has potential to find acceptance among PLWH. DISCLOSURES: All authors: No reported disclosures.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6810640
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-68106402019-10-28 2498. Perceptions of Injectable Antiretrovirals in an Urban HIV Clinic Koren, David E Fedkiv, Volodymyra Zhao, Huaqing Bettiker, Robert Tedaldi, Ellen Samuel, Rafik Open Forum Infect Dis Abstracts BACKGROUND: Although new injectable antiretrovirals (ARV) for HIV may soon be available, there is little research on patient preferences. We examined perceptions of injectable ARV among persons living with HIV (PLWH). METHODS: This cross-sectional study was conducted among PLWH presenting for an appointment at TempleHealth in Philadelphia, PA between March 11 and April 18, 2019. Respondents completed a self-administered survey comprising 29 questions about socio-demographic data, current ARV, and preferences regarding injectable ARV therapies. Responses were recorded on a 10-point Likert scale, on which responses in the 1–5 range were defined as unlikely and 6–10 range as likely to choose injectable ARV. The primary endpoint was to describe factors associated with likely vs. unlikely uptake of injectable ARV. Responses between groups were compared with Chi-square or Wilcoxon rank-sum tests. RESULTS: 171 patients completed a survey with a 56% response rate. Demographics were 60% male, 70% African American, 33% LGBQ-identifying, 2% transgender, with a mean age of 48 ± 13 years. Percentages of likely uptake (55%, n = 94) and unlikely uptake (45%, n = 77) were similar. Median likelihood was 7 (IQR 7–10) and varied from likely (10, IQR 8–10) and unlikely (1, IQR 1–5) cohorts. There were no differences in overall likelihood based on current number of pills or pill frequency (P > 0.05). A likelihood trend was found among patients who missed one or more doses per week, however current adherence was not significant (p = 0.06). Likelihood of uptake means increased as the frequency of administration decreased: 1-week (5.7 ± 3.7), 2-week (5.9 ± 3.7), 1-month (7.3 ± 3.5), 2-month (7.3 ± 3.6), and 3-month (7.7 ± 3.4). Likelihood of uptake decreased as duration of a potential injection site reaction increased: 1 day (6.2 ± 3.5), 2–3 days (4.6 ± 3.3), 4–6 days (3.6 ± 3.1), 7 days or longer (3.0 ± 3.2). Respondents preferred their doctor’s office (60%) over self-injection (23%), assisted injection at home (11%), pharmacy (4%), or special injection center (2%) for administration setting. CONCLUSION: Our study indicates that availability of injectable administration has potential to find acceptance among PLWH. DISCLOSURES: All authors: No reported disclosures. Oxford University Press 2019-10-23 /pmc/articles/PMC6810640/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofz360.2176 Text en © The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial reproduction and distribution of the work, in any medium, provided the original work is not altered or transformed in any way, and that the work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com
spellingShingle Abstracts
Koren, David E
Fedkiv, Volodymyra
Zhao, Huaqing
Bettiker, Robert
Tedaldi, Ellen
Samuel, Rafik
2498. Perceptions of Injectable Antiretrovirals in an Urban HIV Clinic
title 2498. Perceptions of Injectable Antiretrovirals in an Urban HIV Clinic
title_full 2498. Perceptions of Injectable Antiretrovirals in an Urban HIV Clinic
title_fullStr 2498. Perceptions of Injectable Antiretrovirals in an Urban HIV Clinic
title_full_unstemmed 2498. Perceptions of Injectable Antiretrovirals in an Urban HIV Clinic
title_short 2498. Perceptions of Injectable Antiretrovirals in an Urban HIV Clinic
title_sort 2498. perceptions of injectable antiretrovirals in an urban hiv clinic
topic Abstracts
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6810640/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofz360.2176
work_keys_str_mv AT korendavide 2498perceptionsofinjectableantiretroviralsinanurbanhivclinic
AT fedkivvolodymyra 2498perceptionsofinjectableantiretroviralsinanurbanhivclinic
AT zhaohuaqing 2498perceptionsofinjectableantiretroviralsinanurbanhivclinic
AT bettikerrobert 2498perceptionsofinjectableantiretroviralsinanurbanhivclinic
AT tedaldiellen 2498perceptionsofinjectableantiretroviralsinanurbanhivclinic
AT samuelrafik 2498perceptionsofinjectableantiretroviralsinanurbanhivclinic