HIV nonoccupational postexposure prophylaxis (nPEP) has been prescribed to men who have sex with men (MSM) for decades, but the global situation of nPEP implementation among this population remains unclear. To understand nPEP awareness, uptake, and factors associated with uptake among MSM, we searched PubMed, Scopus, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science for studies reporting nPEP implementation among MSM published before May 19, 2019. We estimated pooled rates and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of awareness, uptake using a random-effects model. We identified 74 studies: 3 studies (4.1%) from upper-middle-income regions and 71 (95.9%) from high-income regions. The pooled rate of nPEP awareness and uptake was 51.6% (95% CI 40.6–62.5%) and 6.0% (5.0–7.1%), respectively. Pooled uptake rate was higher in upper-middle-income regions [8.9% (7.8–10.0%)] than in high-income regions [5.8% (4.8–6.9%)]. Unprotected anal sex was the most common exposure (range: 55.0–98.6%, median: 62.9%). Pooled completion of nPEP was 86.9% (79.5–92.8%). Of 19,546 MSM prescribed nPEP, 500 HIV seroconversions (2.6%) were observed. Having risky sexual behaviors and history of sexually transmitted infections were associated with higher nPEP uptake, whereas insufficient knowledge, underestimated risk of exposure to HIV, lack of accessibility, and social stigma might hinder nPEP uptake. Awareness and uptake of nPEP among MSM worldwide are low. Further efforts are needed to combat barriers to access nPEP, including improving accessibility and reducing stigma. Seroconversions post-nPEP uptake suggest that joint prevention precautions aside from nPEP are needed for high-risk MSM. More evidence from low-income and middle-income regions is needed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BeyrerC, BaralSD, van GriensvenF, et al.Global epidemiology of HIV infection in men who have sex with men. Lancet, 2012; 380:367–377.
2.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). HIV InfectionRisk, Prevention, and Testing Behaviors Among Men Who Have Sex With Men—National HIV BehavioralSurveillance, 23 U.S. Cities, 2017. Available at: https://www.cdc.gov/hiv/library/reports/hiv-surveillance.html (Last accessed February21, 2020).
3.
UNAIDS. UNAIDSDATA. 2019. Available at: https://ashm.org.au/products/product/978-1-920773-47-2 (Last accessed February20, 2020).
4.
UNAIDS. HIV Prevention Gap Report. 2016. Available at: https://www.unaids.org/en/resources/documents/2016/prevention-gap (Last accessed February21, 2020).
5.
BeyrerC, BaralSD, CollinsC, et al.The global response to HIV in men who have sex with men. Lancet, 2016; 388:198–206.
6.
SullivanPS, Carballo-DieguezA, CoatesT, et al.Successes and challenges of HIV prevention in men who have sex with men. Lancet, 2012; 380:388–399.
7.
HugoJM, StallRD, RebeK, et al.Knowledge, attitudes and beliefs regarding post exposure prophylaxis among South African men who have sex with men. AIDS Behav, 2016; 20:350–356.
8.
European AIDS Clinical Society (EACS). EACS Guidelines. Vol 2018;. 2018. Available at: www.eacsociety.org/guidelines/eacs-guidelines/eacs-guidelines.html (Last accessed November4, 2019).
9.
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (ASHM). Post-Exposure Prophylaxis after Non-Occupational and Occupational Exposure to HIV: Australian Guidelines (2016). Available at: https://ashm.org.au/products/product/978-1-920773-47-2 (Last accessed November4, 2019).
10.
MoriK, YasutomiY, SawadaS, et al.Suppression of acute viremia by short-term postexposure prophylaxis of simian/human immunodeficiency virus SHIV-RT-infected monkeys with a novel reverse transcriptase inhibitor (GW420867) allows for development of potent antiviral immune responses resulting in efficient containment of infection. J Virol, 2000; 74:5747–5753.
11.
OttenRA, SmithDK, AdamsDR, et al.Efficacy of postexposure prophylaxis after intravaginal exposure of pig-tailed macaques to a human-derived retrovirus (human immunodeficiency virus type 2). J Virol, 2000; 74:9771–9775.
12.
DoAN, CiesielskiCA, MetlerRP, et al.Occupationally acquired human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection: National case surveillance data during 20 years of the HIV epidemic in the United States. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol, 2003; 24:86–96.
13.
CardoDM, CulverDH, CiesielskiCA, et al.A case-control study of HIV seroconversion in health care workers after percutaneous exposure. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Needlestick Surveillance Group. N Engl J Med, 1997; 337:1485–1490.
14.
Al-HajjarSH, FrayhaHH, Al-HazmiM, et al.Prevention of HIV-1 transmission with postexposure prophylaxis after inadvertent infected blood transfusion. AIDS, 2014; 28:1539–1541.
15.
KatzMH, GerberdingJL. The care of persons with recent sexual exposure to HIV. Ann Intern Med, 1998; 128:306–312.
16.
KunchesLM, MeehanTM, BoutwellRC, et al.Survey of nonoccupational HIV postexposure prophylaxis in hospital emergency departments. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr, 2001; 26:263–265.
17.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Updated Guidelines for Antiretroviral Postexposure Prophylaxis AfterSexual, Injection DrugUse, or Other Nonoccupational Exposure to HIV—UnitedStates, 2016. Available at: https://www.cdc.gov/hiv/guidelines/preventing.html (Last accessed November4, 2019).
18.
NisidaI, BoulosMC, DaSL, et al.Predictors of adherence to HIV post-exposure prophylaxis and retention in care after an episode of sexual violence in Brazil. AIDS Patient Care STDS, 2019; 33:399–405.
19.
ShipeoluL, SampselK, ReevesA, et al. HIV nonoccupational postexposure prophylaxis (nPEP) for sexual assault cases: A three-year investigation. AIDS 2020. DOI: 10.1097/QAD.0000000000002507.
20.
CorrellP, SmithD, GrulichA. Post-exposure prophylaxis for non-occupational exposure to HIV: Experience in New South Wales one year after the introduction of the guidelines. N S W Public Health Bull, 2000; 11:113–118.
21.
ReyD, BouhnikAD, Peretti-WatelP, et al.Awareness of non-occupational HIV postexposure prophylaxis among French people living with HIV: The need for better targeting. AIDS, 2007; 21:S71–S76.
22.
LundingS, KatzensteinTL, KronborgG, et al.The Danish PEP registry: Experience with the use of postexposure prophylaxis (PEP) following sexual exposure to HIV from 1998 to 2006. Sex Transm Dis, 2010; 37:49–52.
23.
TanDHS, HullMW, YoongD, et al.Canadian guideline on HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis and nonoccupational postexposure prophylaxis. Can Med Assoc J, 2017; 189:E1448–E1458.
24.
World Health Organization (WHO). Guidelines on Post-exposure Prophylaxis for HIV and the Use of Co-trimoxazole Prophylaxis for HIV-Related Infections Among Adults, Adolescents and Children: Recommendations for a Public Health Approach. Available at: https://www.who.int/hiv/pub/guidelines/arv2013/arvs2013upplement_dec2014/en/ (Last accessed November4, 2019).
25.
CresswellF, WatersL, BriggsE, et al.UK guideline for the use of HIV post-exposure prophylaxis following sexual exposure, 2015. Int J STD AIDS, 2016; 27:713–738.
26.
ChanACH, GoughK, YoongD, et al.Non-occupational post-exposure prophylaxis for HIV at St Michael's Hospital, Toronto: A retrospective review of patient eligibility and clinical outcomes. Int J STD AIDS, 2013; 24:393–397.
27.
ThomasR, GalanakisC, VézinaS, et al.Adherence to post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) and incidence of HIV seroconversion in a major North American cohort. PLos One, 2015; 10:e142534.
28.
MitchellH, FuregatoM, HughesG, et al.What are the characteristics of, and clinical outcomes in men who have sex with men prescribed HIV postexposure prophylaxis following sexual exposure (PEPSE) at sexual health clinics in England?. Sex Transm Infect, 2017; 93:207–213.
29.
RoedlingS, ReevesI, CopasAJ, et al.Changes in the provision of post-exposure prophylaxis for HIV after sexual exposure following introduction of guidelines and publicity campaigns. Int J STD AIDS, 2008; 19:241–242.
30.
JainS, OldenburgCE, MimiagaMJ, et al.Longitudinal trends in HIV non-occupational post-exposure prophylaxis (NPEP) use at a Boston community health center between 1997 and 2013. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr, 2015; 1:97–101.
31.
OzN, AlonD, SteinGY, et al.Adherence and characteristics of HIV post-exposure prophylaxis for a population in Tel Aviv of men who have sex with men. Isr Med Assoc J, 2017; 19:257–261.
32.
ArmishawJ, HoyJF, WatsonKM, et al.Non-occupational post-exposure prophylaxis in Victoria, Australia: Respondingto high rates of re-presentation and low rates of follow-up. Int J STD AIDS, 2011; 22:714–718.
33.
BarberTJ, BennPD. Postexposure prophylaxis for HIV following sexual exposure. Curr Opin HIV AIDS, 2010; 5:322–326.
34.
GulholmT, JamaniS, PoyntenIM, et al.Non-occupational HIV post-exposure prophylaxis at a Sydney metropolitan sexual health clinic. Sex Health, 2013; 10:438–441.
35.
ChauveauM, BillaudE, BonnetB, et al.Tenofovir DF/emtricitabine/rilpivirine as HIV post-exposure prophylaxis: Results from a multicentre prospective study. J Antimicrob Chemother, 2019; 74:1021–1027.
36.
PoyntenIM, SmithDE, CooperDA, et al.The public health impact of widespread availability of nonoccupational postexposure prophylaxis against HIV. HIV Med, 2007; 8:374–381.
37.
CasalinoE, ChoquetC, LeleuA, et al.Trends in condom use and risk behaviours after sexual exposure to HIV: A seven-year observational study. PLos One, 2014; 9:e104350.
38.
SonderGJ, van den HoekA, RegezRM, et al.Trends in HIV postexposure prophylaxis prescription and compliance after sexual exposure in Amsterdam, 2000–2004. Sex Transm Dis, 2007; 34:288–293.
39.
ScholtenM, SuarezI, PlattenM, et al.To prescribe, or not to prescribe: Decision making in HIV-1 post-exposure prophylaxis. HIV Med, 2018; 19:645–653.
40.
FordN, IrvineC, ShubberZ, et al.Adherence to HIV postexposure prophylaxis: A systematic review and meta-analysis. AIDS, 2014; 28:2721–2727.
41.
HugoJM, StallRD, RebeK, et al.Anti-retroviral therapy based HIV prevention among a sample of men who have sex with men in Cape Town, South Africa: Use of post-exposure prophylaxis and knowledge on pre-exposure prophylaxis. AIDS Behav, 2016; 20:357–364.
42.
FosterR, McAllisterJ, ReadTR, et al.Single-tablet emtricitabine-rilpivirine-tenofovir as HIV postexposure prophylaxis in men who have sex with men. Clin Infect Dis, 2015; 61:1336–1341.
43.
McAllisterJW, TownsJM, McnultyA, et al.Dolutegravir with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate-emtricitabine as HIV postexposure prophylaxis in gay and bisexual men. AIDS, 2017; 31:1291–1295.
44.
CheungKT, FairleyCK, ReadTR, et al.HIV incidence and predictors of incident HIV among men who have sex with men attending a sexual health clinic in Melbourne, Australia. PLos One, 2016; 11:e156160.
45.
WhitlockG, McCormackC, FearnleyJ, et al.High HIV incidence in men who have sex with men attending for postexposure prophylaxis: A service evaluation. Sex Transm Infect, 2017; 93:214–216.
46.
MartinJN, RolandME, NeilandsTB, et al.Use of postexposure prophylaxis against HIV infection following sexual exposure does not lead to increases in high-risk behavior. AIDS, 2004; 18:787–792.
47.
PierceAB, El-HayekC, McCarthyD, et al.Comparing non-occupational post-exposure prophylaxis drug regimens for HIV: Insights from a linked HIV surveillance system. Sex Health, 2017; 14:179–187.
48.
O'ByrneP, MacPhersonP, OrserL. Nurse-led HIV PEP program used by men at high risk for HIV seroconversion. J Assoc Nurses AIDS Care, 2018; 4:550–559.
49.
PuroV, De CarliG, PiselliP, et al.HIV incidence among men who have sex with men prescribed postexposure prophylaxis. AIDS, 2012; 26:1581–1583, 1583–1584.
50.
LiberatiA, AltmanDG, TetzlaffJ, et al.The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: Explanation and elaboration. BMJ, 2009; 339:b2700.
51.
StroupDF, BerlinJA, MortonSC, et al.Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: A proposal for reporting. Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) group. JAMA, 2000; 283:2008–2012.
52.
RostomA, DubéC, CranneyA, SaloojeeN, RichmondSy, et al. (2004) Celiac Disease. Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); (Evidence Reports/Technology Assessments, No. 104.) Appendix D. Quality Assessment Forms. Available at: www.ncbi.nlm.nih.Gov/books/NBK35156 (Last accessed November4, 2019).
53.
WellsG, SheaB, O'connellD, PetersonJ, WelchV, LososM, TugwellP. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for assessing the quality of nonrandomised studies in meta-analyses. Available at: www.ohri.ca/programs/clinical_epidemiology/oxford.asp (Last accessed March15, 2019).
54.
MillerJJ.The inverse of the freeman-tukey double arcsine transformation. Am Statistician, 1978; 32:138.
55.
DerSimonianR, KackerR. Random-effects model for meta-analysis of clinical trials: An update. Contemp Clin Trials, 2007; 28:105–114.
56.
HedgesLV, VeveaJL. Fixed- and random-effects models in meta-analysis. Psychol Methods, 1998; 3:486–504.
57.
HigginsJP, ThompsonSG, DeeksJJ, et al.Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ, 2003; 327:557–560.
58.
EggerM, DaveySG, SchneiderM, et al.Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. BMJ, 1997; 315:629–634.
59.
LiuAY, KittredgePV, VittinghoffE, et al.Limited knowledge and use of HIV post- and pre-exposure prophylaxis among gay and bisexual men. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr, 2008; 47:241–247.
60.
ZablotskaIB, PrestageG, HoltM, et al.Australian gay men who have taken nonoccupational postexposure prophylaxis for HIV are in need of effective HIV prevention methods. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr, 2011; 58:424–428.
61.
LinSY, LachowskyNJ, HullM, et al.Awareness and use of nonoccupational post-exposure prophylaxis among men who have sex with men in Vancouver, Canada. HIV Med, 2016; 17:662–673.
62.
EnglerK, RolletK, LessardD, et al.Ability of a rapid HIV testing site to attract and test vulnerable populations: A cross-sectional study on Actuel sur Rue. Int J STD AIDS, 2016; 27:973–977.
63.
PoyntenIM, JinF, MaoL, et al.Nonoccupational postexposure prophylaxis, subsequent risk behaviour and HIV incidence in a cohort of Australian homosexual men. AIDS, 2009; 23:1119–1126.
64.
SidatM, RawstorneP, ListerN, et al.Association between risk of acquiring HIV and beliefs and perceptions about the lived experience of HIV/AIDS among HIV-negative or untested men who have sex with men. AIDS Care, 2006; 18:934–941.
65.
GoedelWC, HagenD, HalkitisPN, et al.Post-exposure prophylaxis awareness and use among men who have sex with men in London who use geosocial-networking smartphone applications. AIDS Care, 2017; 29:579–586.
66.
MinasB, LaingS, JordanH, et al.Improved awareness and appropriate use of non-occupational post-exposure prophylaxis (nPEP) for HIV prevention following a multi-modal communication strategy. BMC Public Health, 2012; 12:906.
67.
JoshiM, BasraA, McCormickC, et al.Post-exposure prophylaxis after sexual exposure (PEPSE) awareness in an HIV-positive cohort. Int J STD AIDS, 2014; 25:67–69.
68.
De SilvaS, MillerRF, WalshJ. Lack of awareness of HIV post-exposure prophylaxis among HIV-infected and uninfected men attending an inner London clinic. Int J STD AIDS, 2006; 17:629–630.
69.
DonnellD, MimiagaMJ, MayerK, et al.Use of non-occupational post-exposure prophylaxis does not lead to an increase in high risk sex behaviors in men who have sex with men participating in the EXPLORE trial. AIDS Behav, 2010; 14:1182–1189.
70.
MayerKH, OldenburgCE, NovakDS, et al.Early adopters: Correlates of HIV chemoprophylaxis use in recent online samples of US men who have sex with men. AIDS Behav, 2016; 20:1489–1498.
71.
WatsonRJ, FishJN, AllenA, et al.Sexual identity disclosure and awareness of HIV prevention methods among black men who have sex with men. J Sex Res, 2018; 8:975–983.
72.
DolezalC, FrascaT, GiguereR, et al.Awareness of post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) and pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is low but interest is high among men engaging in condomless anal sex with men in Boston, Pittsburgh, and San Juan. AIDS Educ Prev, 2015; 27:289–297.
73.
MorganE, SkaathunB, LanckiN, et al.Trends in HIV risk, testing, and treatment among MSM in Chicago 2004–2014: Implications for HIV elimination planning. J Urban Health, 2017; 94:699–709.
74.
MisraK, UdeaguC. Disparities in awareness of HIV postexposure and preexposure prophylaxis among notified partners of HIV-positive individuals, New York City 2015–2017. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr, 2017; 76:132–140.
75.
WaldoCR, StallRD, CoatesTJ. Is offering post-exposure prevention for sexual exposures to HIV related to sexual risk behavior in gay men?. AIDS, 2000; 14:1035–1039.
76.
TorresTS, De BoniRB, de VasconcellosMT, et al.Awareness of prevention strategies and willingness to use preexposure prophylaxis in Brazilian men who have sex with men using apps for sexual encounters: Online cross-sectional study. JMIR Public Health Surveill, 2018; 4:e11.
77.
Fernandez-BalbuenaS, BelzaMJ, CastillaJ, et al.Awareness and use of nonoccupational HIV post-exposure prophylaxis among people receiving rapid HIV testing in Spain. HIV Med, 2013; 14:252–257.
78.
SuominenT, HeikkinenT, PakarinenM, et al.Knowledge of HIV infection and other sexually transmitted diseases among men who have sex with men in Finland. BMC Infect Dis, 2017; 17:121.
79.
ChomcheyN, WoratanaratT, HiransuthikulN, et al.Factors associated with intention to take non-occupational HIV post-exposure prophylaxis among Thai men who have sex with men. J Virus Erad, 2017; 3:128–139.
80.
Van Der SnoekEM, De WitJBF, MulderPGH, et al.Incidence of sexually transmitted diseases and HIV infection related to perceived HIV/AIDS threat since highly active antiretroviral therapy availability in men who have sex with men. Sex Transm Dis, 2005; 32:170–175.
81.
PratiG, ZaniB, PietrantoniL, et al.PEP and TasP awareness among Italian MSM, PLWHA, and high-risk heterosexuals and demographic, behavioral, and social correlates. PLos One, 2016; 11:e157339.
82.
ReyD, MarimoutouC, BouhnikAD, et al.Knowledge of HIV postexposure prophylaxis in a population of HIV-positive outpatients: Results of a French national survey. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr, 2004; 35:393–400.
83.
MitchellJW, SophusAI, PetrollAE. HIV-negative partnered men's willingness to use non-occupational post-exposure prophylaxis and associated factors in a US sample of HIV-negative and HIV-discordant male couples. LGBT Health, 2016; 3:146–152.
84.
KoblinBA, UsherD, NandiV, et al.Post-exposure prophylaxis awareness, knowledge, access and use among three populations in New York City, 2016–17. AIDS Behav, 2018; 22:2718–2732.
85.
KoNY, WuHJ, StrongC, et al.Differences in awareness of and willingness to use pre-exposure prophylaxis and anticipated condom use among serodiscordant couples in Taiwan. AIDS Care, 2018; 30:1306–1310.
86.
OtisJ, McFadyenA, HaigT, et al.Beyond condoms: Risk reduction strategies among gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men receiving rapid HIV testing in Montreal, Canada. AIDS Behav, 2016; 20:2812–2826.
87.
MurphyDA, LeaT, de WitJB, et al.Interest in using rectal microbicides among Australian gay men is associated with perceived HIV vulnerability and engaging in condomless sex with casual partners: Results from a national survey. Sex Transm Infect, 2015; 91:266–268.
88.
HoltM, LeaT, SchmidtHM, et al.Willingness to use and have sex with men taking HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP): Results of online surveys of Australian gay and bisexual men, 2011–2015. Sex Transm Infect, 2017; 93:438–444.
89.
HegaziA, LeeMJ, WhittakerW, et al.Chemsex and the city: Sexualised substance use in gay bisexual and other men who have sex with men attending sexual health clinics. Int J STD AIDS, 2017; 28:362–366.
90.
AghaizuA, MerceyD, CopasA, et al.Who would use PrEP? Factors associated with intention to use among MSM in London: A community survey. Sex Transm Infect, 2013; 89:207–211.
91.
WhitlockGG, DouglasA, AdesaraS, et al.How many MSM are taking PrEP: A service evaluation. Sex Transm Infect, 2017; 93:529.
92.
KalichmanSC.Post-exposure prophylaxis for HIV infection in gay and bisexual men. Implications for the future of HIV prevention. Am J Prev Med, 1998; 15:120–127.
93.
ManserghG, KoblinBA, ColfaxGN, et al.Preefficacy use and sharing of antiretroviral medications to prevent sexually-transmitted HIV infection among US men who have sex with men. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr, 2010; 55:E14–E16.
94.
VoetschAC, HeffelfingerJD, BegleyEB, et al.Knowledge and use of preexposure and postexposure prophylaxis among attendees of minority gay pride events, 2005 through 2006. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr, 2007; 46:378–380.
95.
MehtaSA, SilveraR, BernsteinK, et al.Awareness of post-exposure HIV prophylaxis in high-risk men who have sex with men in New York City. Sex Transm Infect, 2011; 87:344–348.
96.
HoltM, LeaT, MaoL, et al.Community-level changes in condom use and uptake of HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis by gay and bisexual men in Melbourne and Sydney, Australia: Results of repeated behavioural surveillance in 2013–2017. Lancet HIV, 2018; 5:e448–e456.
97.
BourneA, AlbaB, GarnerA, et al.Use of, and likelihood of using, HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis among men who have sex with men in Europe and Central Asia: Findings from a 2017 large geosocial networking application survey. Sex Transm Infect, 2019; 95:187–192.
98.
OngJJ, LandikaA, FairleyCK, et al.Characteristics, sexual practices and sexually transmissible infections diagnoses of men who have sex with men and use non-occupational HIV post-exposure prophylaxis in Victoria, Australia. Sex Health, 2016; 6:555–559.
99.
HeukerJ, SonderGJ, StolteI, et al.High HIV incidence among MSM prescribed postexposure prophylaxis, 2000–2009: Indications for ongoing sexual risk behaviour. AIDS, 2012; 26:505–512.
100.
LlewellynC, MartinH, NixonE. What is the extent of repeat prescriptions for post-exposure prophylaxis for HIV after sexual exposure among men who have sex with men in the UK?. Sex Health, 2016; 13:595–596.
101.
JainS, OldenburgCE, MimiagaMJ, et al.Subsequent HIV infection among men who have sex with men who used non-occupational post-exposure prophylaxis at a Boston community health center: 1997–2013. AIDS Patient Care STDS, 2015; 29:20–25.
102.
SchechterM, Do LagoRF, MendelsohnAB, et al.Behavioral impact, acceptability, and HIV incidence among homosexual men with access to postexposure chemoprophylaxis for HIV. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr, 2004; 35:519–525.
103.
MarzelA, HeinrichH, SchilligerL, et al.Prescription of postexposure prophylaxis for HIV-1 in the emergency room: Correct transmission risk assessment remains challenging. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr, 2017; 74:359–366.
104.
HamlynE, McAllisterJ, WinstonA, et al.Is screening for sexually transmitted infections in men who have sex with men who receive non-occupational HIV post-exposure prophylaxis worthwhile?. Sex Transm Infect, 2006; 82:21–23.
105.
KornerH, HendryO, KippaxS. Safe sex after post-exposure prophylaxis for HIV: Intentions, challenges and ambivalences in narratives of gay men. AIDS Care, 2006; 18:879–887.
106.
TeoA, TaiBC, ChioM, et al.A mixed methods study of non-occupational post-exposure prophylaxis at an STI clinic in Singapore: Five-year retrospective analysis and providers' perspectives. PLos One, 2018; 8:e202267.
107.
WongK, HughesCA, PlittS, et al.HIV non-occupational postexposure prophylaxis in a Canadian province: Treatment completion and follow-up testing. Int J STD AIDS, 2010; 21:617–621.
108.
McAllisterJ, ReadP, McNultyA, et al.Raltegravir-emtricitabine-tenofovir as HIV nonoccupational post-exposure prophylaxis in men who have sex with men: Safety, tolerability and adherence. HIV Med, 2014; 15:13–22.
109.
LacombeK, Daguenel-NguyenA, LebeauV, et al.Determinants of adherence to non-occupational post HIV exposure prophylaxis. AIDS, 2006; 20:291–294.
110.
LandovitzRJ, FletcherJB, InzhakovaG, et al.A novel combination HIV prevention strategy: Post-exposure prophylaxis with contingency management for substance abuse treatment among methamphetamine-using men who have sex with men. AIDS Patient Care STDS, 2012; 26:320–328.
111.
BeymerMR, BolanRK, FlynnRP, et al.Uptake and repeat use of postexposure prophylaxis in a community-based clinic in Los Angeles, California. AIDS Res Hum Retroviruses, 2014; 30:848–855.
112.
DankoM, BuzwellS, EarleM. Men at risk of HIV: Sexual sensation seeking, sexual compulsivity and sexual risk behavior among Australian MSM who frequently present for post-exposure prophylaxis. Sex Addict Compulsivity, 2016; 23:324–341.
113.
ManserghG, KoblinB, ColfaxGN, et al.‘Less education’ is associated with use and sharing of antiretroviral medications for prophylaxis of HIV infection by US men who have sex with men. Sex Transm Infect, 2011; 87:510.
114.
JainS, KrakowerDS, MayerKH. The transition from postexposure prophylaxis to preexposure prophylaxis: An emerging opportunity for biobehavioral HIV prevention. Clin Infect Dis, 2015; 603:S200–S204.
115.
SayerC, FisherM, NixonE, et al.Will I? Won't I? Why do men who have sex with men present for post-exposure prophylaxis for sexual exposures?. Sex Transm Infect, 2009; 85:206–211.
116.
KörnerH, HendryO, KippaxS. Negotiating risk and social relations in the context of post-exposure prophylaxis for HIV: Narratives of gay men. Health Risk Soc, 2005; 7:349–360.
117.
McFaulK, RowleyD, O'ReillyA, et al.Access to post-exposure prophylaxis following sexual exposure for men who have sex with men in an Irish healthcare setting. Int J STD AIDS, 2015; 26:521–525.
118.
RodriguezAE, CastelAD, ParishCL, et al.HIV medical providers' perceptions of the use of antiretroviral therapy as nonoccupational postexposure prophylaxis in 2 major metropolitan areas. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr, 2013; 641:S68–S79.
119.
PalichR, Martin-BlondelG, CuzinL, et al.Experiences of HIV postexposure prophylaxis (PEP) among highly exposed men who have sex with men (MSM). Sex Transm Infect, 2017; 93:493–498.
120.
OldenburgCE, Perez-BrumerAG, HatzenbuehlerML, et al.State-level structural sexual stigma and HIV prevention in a national online sample of HIV-uninfected MSM in the United States. AIDS, 2015; 29:837–845.
121.
GrovC.Gay men's perspectives on hiv prevention and treatment in Berlin, Germany: Lessons for policy and prevention. Int J Sex Health, 2017; 29:124–134.
122.
NodinN, Carballo-DieguezA, VentuneacAM, et al.Knowledge and acceptability of alternative HIV prevention bio-medical products among MSM who bareback. AIDS Care, 2008; 20:106–115.
123.
ShaverJ, SullivanP, SieglerA, et al.Comparing provider and client preferences for HIV prevention services in south africa among men who have sex with men. J Int Assoc Provid AIDS Care, 2017; 16:562–571.
124.
DoddsC.Positive benefits: Preventive impact of post-exposure prophylaxis awareness among those with diagnosed HIV. Sex Transm Infect, 2008; 84:92–93.
125.
KlassenBJ, LachowskyNJ, LinSY, et al.Gay men's understanding and education of new HIV prevention technologies in Vancouver, Canada. Qual Health Res, 2017; 27:1775–1791.
126.
NallP.Management of sexually transmitted infections in non-genitourinary specialist settings. Medicine, 2014; 42:307–309.
127.
FordN, ShubberZ, CalmyA, et al.Choice of antiretroviral drugs for postexposure prophylaxis for adults and adolescents: A systematic review. Clin Infect Dis, 2015; 60:S170–S176.
128.
BlashillAJ, EhlingerPP, MayerKH, et al.Optimizing adherence to preexposure and postexposure prophylaxis: The need for an integrated biobehavioral approach. Clin Infect Dis, 2015; 60:S187–S190.
129.
GolubSA, RosenthalL, CohenDE, et al.Determinants of high-risk sexual behavior during post-exposure prophylaxis to prevent HIV infection. AIDS Behav, 2008; 12:852–859.
130.
CalabreseSK, TekesteM, MayerKH, et al.Considering stigma in the provision of HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis: Reflections from current prescribers. AIDS Patient Care STDS, 2019; 33:79–88.
131.
ZhangC, McMahonJ, FiscellaK, et al.HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis implementation cascade among health care professionals in the United States: Implications from a systematic review and meta-analysis. AIDS Patient Care STDS, 2019; 33:507–527.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
