Abstract
Introduction Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is an effective, yet underutilized tool for HIV prevention. We sought to understand practice patterns and opportunities for prescribing PrEP across two large, urban, academic healthcare institutions in Chicago, Illinois.
Methods We analyzed electronic medical record data from two institutions including encounters for persons ≥18 years of age with ≥1 negative HIV test between 1/1/2015-12/31/2021 who had indications for PrEP. Eligible encounters were those within a six-month window after STI diagnosis, or as long as injection drug use (IDU) was documented. We categorized encounters as inpatient, emergency department (ED), primary care, infectious disease (ID), obstetrics and gynecology/women’s health (OBGYN) and other outpatient settings. We performed bivariable and multivariable mixed effects regression models to examine associations, reporting odds ratios (or adjusted odds ratios) and 95% confidence intervals (OR, aOR, 95% CI).
Results In total, 9644 persons contributed 53031 encounters that resulted in 4653 PrEP prescriptions. The two healthcare institutions had differing patient demographics; institution A had more 18–24 year-olds (58.3% vs 31.3%), more African Americans (83.8% vs 27.9%), and more women (65.7% vs 46.3%). Institution B had more White (40.6% vs 7.1%) and Hispanic persons (14.0% vs 4.2%), and more men who have sex with men (MSM) (15.2% vs 3.3%). Institution A had more eligible encounters in the ED (30.8% vs 7.3%) as well as in infectious disease, inpatient, OBYGN, and primary care settings. Institution B accounted for the majority of PrEP prescriptions (97.0%).
Adjusted models found lower odds of PrEP prescriptions in non-Hispanic Black (aOR 0.23 [0.16, 0.32]) and Latino (aOR 0.62 [0.44, 0.89]) patients, those with injection drug use (aOR 0.01 [0.00, 0.09]), men who have sex with women (aOR 0.36 [0.23, 0.56]), women who have sex with men (aOR 0.11 [0.06, 0.19]), and in the ED (ref) or OBGYN (0.11 [0.04, 0.27]) settings; while increased odds of PrEP prescription were associated with non-Hispanic White (ref) and MSM (aOR 24.87 [15.79, 39.15]) patients, and encounters at Institution B (aOR 1.78 [1.25, 2.53]) and in infectious disease (aOR [11.92 [7.65, 18.58]), primary care (aOR 2.76 [1.90, 4.01]), and other outpatient subspecialty settings (aOR 2.67 [1.84, 3.87]).
Conclusions Institution A contained persons historically underrepresented in PrEP prescriptions, while institution B accounted for most PrEP prescriptions. Opportunities exist to improve equity in PrEP prescribing and across ED and OBGYN settings.
Competing Interest Statement
Moira McNulty has served on an advisory board for Gilead Sciences. Jessica Ridgway has received consulting fees from Gilead Sciences. Anu Hazra receives research support from Gilead Sciences, and has served on advisory boards for Gilead Sciences and Viiv Healthcare. All other authors report no conflicts of interest. Eleanor Friedman has received funds as part of a Gilead FOCUS grant.
Funding Statement
This publication was made possible with support from the Third Coast Center for AIDS Research (CFAR), an NIH funded center (P30 AI117943).
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The Institutional Review Boards at the University of Chicago (IRB22-0237) and Northwestern University (STU00202938) gave ethical approval for this work.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All data produced in the present work are contained in the manuscript.
