AIDS and Behavior

, Volume 17, Issue 6, pp 2173–2179 | Cite as

Perceived Likelihood of Using HIV Pre-exposure Prophylaxis Medications Among Young Men Who Have Sex with Men

  • Brian Mustanski
  • Amy K. Johnson
  • Robert Garofalo
  • Daniel Ryan
  • Michelle Birkett
Brief Report

Abstract

Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is a new strategy for reducing the risk of HIV infection; however, questions about the likelihood of use remain. As part of an ongoing longitudinal study of YMSM, interest in PrEP use under various conditions of side-effects, dosing, and effectiveness were assessed. Participants aged 16–20 living in Chicago and the surrounding areas were recruited beginning December 2009, using a modified form of respondent driven sampling. A cross-sectional sample of 171 HIV negative YMSM interviewed approximately 6 months after initial enrollment was analyzed. This sample was somewhat interested in adopting PrEP as an HIV prevention strategy, particularly if the dosing and side-effects burden was low and the perceived benefits were high. PrEP interest was unrelated with drug use and number of sexual partners, but negatively correlated with number of unprotected anal sex acts. The scale was positively associated with intentions for use in specific risk situations.

Keywords

Pre-exposure prophylaxis Biomedical HIV prevention Young MSM Gay Bisexual 

RESUMEN

Profilaxis de Pre-exposición (PrEP) es una estrategia para reducir el riesgo de infección de VIH; sin embargo, existen dudas sobre la probabilidad de su uso. Interés en el uso de PrEP, tomando en cuenta los efectos secundarios, dosificación y eficacia, fueron evaluados en un grupo de hombres jóvenes que tienen relaciones sexuales con hombres (HJSH). Estos participantes están inscritos en un estudio longitudinal. Para ser incluido, participantes tenían que estar entre 16 a 20 años de edad y residir en la cuidad de Chicago a partir de Diciembre 2009. Los participantes fueron reclutados utilizando un variante del método respondent-driven sampling (RDS). Se realizó un estudio transversal con una muestra de 171 HJSH seronegativos para el análisis. Los participantes fueron entrevistados aproximadamente 6 meses después de la inscripción inicial. Los resultados indicaron que esta población está algo interesado en la adaptación de PrEP como una estrategia de prevención del VIH. El interés sube cuando se percibe como baja la carga de efectos secundarios y la dosificación y los beneficios altos. El consumo de drogas y el número de parejas sexuales no estaba relacionado con interés en PrEP. Además el numero de actos de sexo anal sin protección estaba negativamente correlacionado con el interés en PrEP. La escala tenia una asociación positiva con la intención de utilizar PrEp en situaciones de riesgo sexual.

References

  1. 1.
    Grant RM, Lama JR, Anderson PL, et al. Preexposure chemoprophylaxis for HIV prevention in men who have sex with men. N Engl J Med. 2010;363(27):2587–99.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Donnell D, Baeten J, Hendrix C, editors. Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate drug levels indicate PrEP use is strongly correlated with HIV-1 protective effects: Kenya and Uganda. In: 19th conference on retroviruses and opportunistic infections; 2012 March 5–8, Seattle, WA.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Baeten J, Celum C, editors. Antiretroviral pre-exposure prophylaxis for HIV-1 prevention among heterosexual African men and women: the partners PrEP study. In: 6th International AIDS Society conference on HIV pathogenesis, treatment and prevention; 2011 July 17–20, Rome.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    CDC (2011). Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) for HIV prevention promoting safe and effectiveness use in the United States: new tool to reduce the risk of HIV infection among gay and bisexual men. Atlanta, GA: US Department of Health and Human Services. (Accessed 2012 May 15); http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/prep/pdf/PrEPfactsheet.pdf.
  5. 5.
    Prejean J, Song R, Hernandez A, et al. Estimated HIV incidence in the United States, 2006–2009. PLoS ONE. 2011;6(8):e17502.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Rudy BJ, Murphy DA, Harris DR, Muenz L, Ellen J. Patient-related risks for nonadherence to antiretroviral therapy among HIV-infected youth in the United States: a study of prevalence and interactions. AIDS Patient Care STDS. 2009;23(3):185–94.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Golub SA, Kowalczyk W, Weinberger CL, Parson JT. Preexposure prophylaxis and predicted condom use among high-risk men who have sex with men. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2010;54(5):548–55.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Koblin BA, Mansergh G, Frye V, et al. Condom-use decision making in the context of hypothetical pre-exposure prophylaxis efficacy among substance-using men who have sex with men: project MIX. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2011;58(3):319–27.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Heckathorn DD. Respondent-driven sampling: a new approach to the study of hidden populations. Soc Probl. 1997;44:174–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Carey MP, Schroder KE. Development and psychometric evaluation of the brief HIV knowledge questionnaire. AIDS Educ Prev. 2002;14(2):172–82.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mustanski B, Lyons T, Garcia SC. Internet use and sexual health of young men who have sex with men: a mixed-methods study. Arch Sex Behav. 2011;40(2):289–300.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Carey MP, Morrison-Beedy D, Johnson BT. The HIV-knowledge questionnaire: development and evaluation of a reliable, valid, and practical self-administered questionnaire. AIDS Behav. 1997;1(1):61–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Zwick WR, Velicer WF. Comparison of five rules for determining the number of components to retain. Psychol Bull. 1986;99(3):432–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Cattell RB. Multivariate behavioral research and the integrative challenge. Multivar Behav Res. 1966;1(2):245–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Mustanski BS, Newcomb ME, Du Bois SN, Garcia SC, Grov C. HIV in young men who have sex with men: a review of epidemiology, risk and protective factors, and interventions. J Sex Res. 2011;48(2):218–53.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ross CE. Wu C-l. The links between education and health. Am Sociol Rev. 1995;60(5):719–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Mustanski B, Newcomb ME, Clerkin EM. Relationship characteristics and sexual risk-taking in young men who have sex with men. Health Psychol. 2011;30(5):597–605.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Brian Mustanski
    • 1
  • Amy K. Johnson
    • 2
  • Robert Garofalo
    • 2
  • Daniel Ryan
    • 1
  • Michelle Birkett
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Medical Social SciencesFeinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern UniversityChicagoUSA
  2. 2.Children’s Memorial HospitalChicagoUSA

Personalised recommendations