Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
BMC Public Health ; 24(1): 1617, 2024 Jun 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38886691

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Especially in high HIV prevalence contexts, such as Zambia, effective biomedical prevention tools are needed for priority populations (PPs), including key populations (KPs), who are at higher risk. HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) has been scaled up nationally in Zambia, but little is known about barriers to PrEP use among specific PPs to date. METHODS: To understand barriers and facilitators to PrEP use in Zambia, we conducted a qualitative case study of PrEP services to PPs including sero-discordant couples (SDCs), female sex workers (FSWs), and men who have sex with men (MSM) in Livingstone. The study conducted in 2021 included in-depth interviews (n = 43) guided by the socio-ecological model, and focus group discussions (n = 4) with clinic and community-based providers and PrEP-eligible clients including users and non-users across PP groups. We used thematic analysis to analyze data using codes derived both deductively and inductively. RESULTS: We found multilevel barriers and facilitators to PrEP use. Cross-cutting barriers shared across PP groups included amplifying effects of PrEP being mistaken for antiretroviral drugs used to treat HIV, including anticipated stigma, and concerns about side-effects based on both misinformation and experience. In addition, stigmatized identities, particularly that of MSM, served as a barrier to PrEP use. The fear of being mislabeled as having HIV was of greatest concern for FSWs. Facilitators to PrEP use primarily included the importance of confidential, KP-sensitive services, and the role of informed, supportive family, friends, and peers. Participants across all PP groups urged expanded education efforts to increase awareness of PrEP within the general population toward mitigating concerns of being mislabeled as living with HIV. CONCLUSION: To our knowledge, this is the first qualitative study of the PrEP cascade among multiple PPs in Zambia. This study provides important explanation for the low rates of PrEP continuation found in earlier demonstration trials among KPs in Zambia. The study also offers recommendations for programming efforts going forward such as inclusive PrEP awareness campaigns, expanded KP sensitivity training, and related efforts to thwart PrEP stigma while expanding access.


Subject(s)
Focus Groups , HIV Infections , Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis , Qualitative Research , Sex Workers , Humans , Zambia , Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis/statistics & numerical data , Male , HIV Infections/prevention & control , Female , Adult , Sex Workers/psychology , Sex Workers/statistics & numerical data , Social Stigma , Patient Acceptance of Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Patient Acceptance of Health Care/psychology , Young Adult , Homosexuality, Male/statistics & numerical data , Homosexuality, Male/psychology , Anti-HIV Agents/therapeutic use , Interviews as Topic , Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice , Middle Aged , Health Services Accessibility
2.
J Travel Med ; 23(1)2016 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26782122

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Respiratory viruses spread in humans across wide geographical areas in short periods of time, resulting in high levels of morbidity and mortality. We undertook a systematic review to assess the evidence that air, ground and sea mass transportation systems or hubs are associated with propagating influenza and coronaviruses. METHODS: Healthcare databases and sources of grey literature were searched using pre-defined criteria between April and June 2014. Two reviewers screened all identified records against the protocol, undertook risk of bias assessments and extracted data using a piloted form. Results were analysed using a narrative synthesis. RESULTS: Forty-one studies met the eligibility criteria. Risk of bias was high in the observational studies, moderate to high in the reviews and moderate to low in the modelling studies. In-flight influenza transmission was identified substantively on five flights with up to four confirmed and six suspected secondary cases per affected flight. Five studies highlighted the role of air travel in accelerating influenza spread to new areas. Influenza outbreaks aboard cruise ships affect 2-7% of passengers. Influenza transmission events have been observed aboard ground transport vehicles. High heterogeneity between studies and the inability to exclude other sources of infection means that the risk of influenza transmission from an index case to other passengers cannot be accurately quantified. A paucity of evidence was identified describing severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus transmission events associated with transportation systems or hubs. CONCLUSION: Air transportation appears important in accelerating and amplifying influenza propagation. Transmission occurs aboard aeroplanes, at the destination and possibly at airports. Control measures to prevent influenza transmission on cruise ships are needed to reduce morbidity and mortality. There is no recent evidence of sea transport accelerating influenza or coronavirus spread to new areas. Further investigation is required regarding the roles of ground transportation systems and transport hubs in pandemic situations.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/transmission , Influenza, Human/transmission , Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome/transmission , Transportation , Air Travel , Airports , Humans , Influenza, Human/epidemiology , Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus , Risk Factors , Severe acute respiratory syndrome-related coronavirus , Ships
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...