Complex PrEP: the factors requiring consultant-led review of PrEP users
- PMID: 35169002
- PMCID: PMC9685731
- DOI: 10.1136/sextrans-2021-055277
Complex PrEP: the factors requiring consultant-led review of PrEP users
Abstract
Introduction: HIV-1 pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) has been available in England since March 2020 on the National Health Service using generic emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil. 56 Dean Street (56DS) provided PrEP through (1) additional private care from September 2015, estimated to be providing 11% of England's PrEP in 2019; and (2) the IMPACT trial, as well as monitoring those self-sourcing PrEP. Providing PrEP at scale through a nurse-led service required a safety net for complex individuals. 56DS introduced a consultant-led PrEP outpatient service, the PrEP review clinic, in January 2018 and we report the outcomes of this service.
Methods: We present a retrospective case note review of the PrEP review clinic with descriptive outcomes from 26 January 2018 to 20 December 2019. Reason for referral, demographics, PrEP management and PrEP discontinuations were recorded.
Results: 13 980 unique users accessed PrEP from 56DS during the two year evaluation period. 220 individuals were seen in the PrEP review clinic. Majority of patients were referred for renal issues (114 of 220, 51.8%), followed by side effects (59 of 220, 26.8%) and comorbidities (38 of 220, 17.2%). Of those with renal issues, 89 (out of 114, 78.1%) users were referred for an abnormal estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR). 35 (out of 114, 30.7%) PrEP users had an eGFR between 45 and 59 mL/min/1.73 m2, of whom 2 (5.7%) discontinued PrEP. Majority of users were advised to stop supplements±switch to event-based dosing (24 of 35, 68.6%). Ten PrEP users were referred with an eGFR between 30 and 44 mL/min/1.73 m2; 4 (40%) stopped or did not start PrEP and 6 (60%) were asked to stop supplements±switch to event-based dosing.
Discussion: A small proportion of PrEP users have complex PrEP issues. Methods to manage renal dysfunction with PrEP included stopping supplements and switching to event-based dosing. Those with side effects were managed with an array of options, with only modest effectiveness. Other PrEP options are needed to support those with toxicities or intolerances.
Keywords: health services research; pre-exposure prophylaxis; sexual health.
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.
Conflict of interest statement
Competing interests: GW is PI for DISCOVER. SM is an investigator on PrEPVacc, for which Gilead is supplying free drug and some funding for DBS and social science.
References
-
- Clinical Commissioning Policy . Reimbursement for the use of generic drugs for pre exposure prophylaxis (PreP) for the prevention of HIV, 2021. NHS. Available: https://www.england.nhs.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Policy-statement-P... [Accessed 07 Jul 2021].
-
- Owen G. Online PreP assessment tool: safe use of PreP in existing users. 20. British Association for Sexual Health and HIV, 2019.
-
- BHIVA clinical guidelines . BHIVA/BASHH guidelines on the use of HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PreP), 2018. Available: https://www.bhiva.org/file/5b729cd592060/2018-PrEP-Guidelines.pdf [Accessed 10 Aug 2020].
-
- NICE clinical guidelines . Chronic kidney disease in adults: assessment and management, 2014. Available: nice.org.uk/guidance/cg182 [Accessed 04 Dec 2020].
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
Research Materials
Miscellaneous