Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-02T21:25:00.807Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Adherence to HIV Postexposure Prophylaxis in a Major Hospital in Northwestern Nigeria

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2018

Farouq Muhammad Dayyab*
Affiliation:
Infectious and Tropical Diseases Unit, Department of Medicine, Aminu Kano Teaching Hospital, Kano, Nigeria
Garba Iliyasu
Affiliation:
Infectious and Tropical Diseases Unit, Department of Medicine, College of Health Sciences, Bayero University Kano, Nigeria.
Abdulrazaq Garba Habib
Affiliation:
Infectious and Tropical Diseases Unit, Department of Medicine, College of Health Sciences, Bayero University Kano, Nigeria.
*
Address correspondence to Dr Farouq Muhammad Dayyab, Infectious and Tropical Diseases Unit, Department of Medicine, Aminu Kano Teaching Hospital, Kano, Nigeria ([email protected]).
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Type
Letters to the Editor
Copyright
© 2018 by The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America. All rights reserved 

To the Editor—Of crucial importance in the success of HIV postexposure prophylaxis (PEP) is adherence to the 28 days course of antiretroviral treatment (ART). 1 Nevertheless, uptake of HIV PEP is acknowledged to be insufficient, with <60% of the individuals who started PEP treatment finishing the full course.Reference Ford, Irvine and Shubber 2 It is important to determine why HIV PEP adherence remains a challenge across different populations, settings, and exposures.Reference Ford, Irvine and Shubber 2 Previous studies have reported higher PEP treatment completion rates with a 2-drug regimen compared to a 3-drug regimen.Reference Ford, Irvine and Shubber 2 , Reference Bassett, Freedberg and Walensky 3 One reason for noncompletion of treatment is the adverse effects of ART used for PEP.Reference Weber, Wang and Panlilio 4 , Reference Tokars, Marcus and Culver 5 In this study, HIV PEP treatment adherence was defined as initiating PEP treatment following occupational exposure to HIV, returning to pick up subsequent doses, and completing the rest of the PEP course as well as follow-up visits. Those that failed to adhere to PEP treatment were classified as defaulters. We examined the predictors of PEP default in a tertiary-care hospital in northwestern Nigeria.

This retrospective cohort study was conducted at a major tertiary-care hospital that is home to the largest antiretroviral treatment (ART) center in northwestern Nigeria. The ethics committee of the hospital approved this study.

We examined details of all reported incidences of occupational exposures to an HIV-positive source that occurred within the hospital from October 2004 to December 2016. In total, 70 healthcare workers exposed to HIV positive sources took PEP during the study period, and 51 patients completed the treatment while 19 defaulted (27%).

As shown in Table 1, our study revealed that those on a non–tenofovir-containing regimen were 2.6 times more likely to default PEP compared to those on a tenofovir-containing regimen (P=.0199). This finding may be related to the better tolerability of the tenofovir-based regimen compared to the zidovudine-based regimen, as reported by previous studies.Reference Ford, Shubber and Calmy 6 , Reference Tosini, Muller and Prazuck 7 We also found that patients prescribed 3 pills for HIV PEP were more likely to default than those prescribed 2 pills. This finding was not statistically significant. Previous studies have reported a higher PEP regimen completion rate with low pill burden.Reference Fisher, Benn and Evans 8 , Reference Sultan, Benn and Waters 9 Another finding, which was also not statistically significant, was that nonphysicians and staff stationed in the medical wards were more likely to default on their PEP treatment. A possible reason for this is that nonphysicians underestimate the need to complete treatment and/or that staff in the medical ward might have underestimated exposure risks compared to those in the surgical ward.

TABLE 1 Examining for Predictors of PEP Default in Bivariate Analysis

NOTE. CI, confidence interval; TDF, tenofovir; ART, antiretroviral treatment.

a Specifically refer to combination ART that excludes tenofovir but includes a combination of zidovudine, lamivudine, stavudine, efavirenz, and nevirapine.

b Refers to a nurse, laboratory scientists, health attendants, and students.

This study highlights predictors of PEP default in a tertiary-care hospital in a resource-limited setting. Nontenofovir containing regimen was a statistically significant predictor of PEP default, while 3 pills compared to 2 pills, staff in the medical ward and nonphysician status, though not statistically significant, also predicted default PEP treatment. However, the role of pill burden, category, and station of staff as predictors of PEP default should be further investigated in a multicenter prospective design using a larger sample size. This knowledge will help clinicians understand how to improve PEP uptake to prevent new HIV infections.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

The authors gratefully acknowledge all members of the infection control committee of the hospital.

Financial support: No financial support was provided relevant to this article.

Potential conflicts of interest: All authors report no conflicts of interest relevant to this article.

References

REFERENCES

1. World Health Organization. Factsheet: Post-Exposure Prophylaxis to Prevent HIV Infection. Geneva, Switzerland: WHO; 2014.Google Scholar
2. Ford, N, Irvine, C, Shubber, Z, et al. Adherence to HIV postexposure prophylaxis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Aids 2014;28:27212727.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3. Bassett, IV, Freedberg, KA, Walensky, RP. Two drugs or three? Balancing efficacy, toxicity, and resistance in postexposure prophylaxis for occupational exposure to HIV. Clin Infect Dis 2004;39:395401.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4. Weber, D, Wang, SA, Panlilio, AL, et al. Experience of healthcare workers taking postexposure prophylaxis after occupational HIV exposures: findings of the HIV Postexposure Prophylaxis Registry. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2000;21:780785.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Tokars, JI, Marcus, R, Culver, DH, et al. Surveillance of HIV infection and zidovudine use among health care workers after occupational exposure to HIV-infected blood. Ann Intern Med 1993;118:913919.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6. Ford, N, Shubber, Z, Calmy, A, et al. Choice of antiretroviral drugs for postexposure prophylaxis for adults and adolescents: a systematic review. Clin Infect Dis 2015;60:S170S176.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
7. Tosini, W, Muller, P, Prazuck, T, et al. Tolerability of HIV postexposure prophylaxis with tenofovir/emtricitabine and lopinavir/ritonavir tablet formulation. AIDS 2010;24:23752380.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
8. Fisher, M, Benn, P, Evans, B, et al. UK Guideline for the use of post-exposure prophylaxis for HIV following sexual exposure. Int J STD AIDS 2006;17:8192.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9. Sultan, B, Benn, P, Waters, L. Current perspectives in HIV post-exposure prophylaxis. HIV AIDS (Auckl) 2014;6:147158.Google ScholarPubMed
Figure 0

TABLE 1 Examining for Predictors of PEP Default in Bivariate Analysis