Physician Attitudes Toward the Ethics of Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP): Cost, Safety, and Resource Allocation

J. Grippo, S. Smallwood, Katherine Pincura, T. Wright, William Mase
{"title":"Physician Attitudes Toward the Ethics of Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP): Cost, Safety, and Resource Allocation","authors":"J. Grippo, S. Smallwood, Katherine Pincura, T. Wright, William Mase","doi":"10.21633/JGPHA.7.104","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: In the United States, human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) remains a substantial public health issue. There is evidence that the use of antiretroviral medications such as pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) can be a safe and effective primary prevention strategy to reduce new cases of HIV infection. Provider practice behavior as it relates to prescribing PrEP and the potential impact on specific vulnerable populations needs increased attention. Few studies have evaluated the attitudes of physicians towards ethical issues related to prescribing PrEP. Methods: The purpose of the present literature review was to evaluate provider attitudes toward the ethics of prescribing PrEP for individuals at risk of acquiring HIV infection. Searches of the PubMed and Cochrane databases were conducted. Three reviewers independently assessed the relevance of articles and discarded those not directly related to the attitudes of physicians toward ethics of the cost, safety, and resource allocation of PrEP. A total of twenty-one articles were included in the review. Results: Provider attitudes and perceptions focused on three areas: resource allocation, cost, and safety or effectiveness of PrEP. Providers who were hesitant in prescribing PrEP were concerned with the availability of resources, patient adherence, risk of drug resistance, and toxicity. In the studies reviewed, few providers had prescribed PrEP; however, prescribing practices trended upward with time and awareness. Conclusions: Realization of the benefits of PrEP will require a utilitarian ethical approach to identifying the populations that will benefit most, monitoring for adverse effects, addressing costs, and educating and training providers to prescribe PrEP responsibly. Ensuring that PrEP fulfills its potential as part of a combination regimen for HIV prevention requires identification of additional evidence, education, support services, and resources that are needed, as well as the regulatory framework and cost scenarios for access to PrEP.","PeriodicalId":73981,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Georgia Public Health Association","volume":"7 1","pages":"19-25"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Georgia Public Health Association","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21633/JGPHA.7.104","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: In the United States, human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) remains a substantial public health issue. There is evidence that the use of antiretroviral medications such as pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) can be a safe and effective primary prevention strategy to reduce new cases of HIV infection. Provider practice behavior as it relates to prescribing PrEP and the potential impact on specific vulnerable populations needs increased attention. Few studies have evaluated the attitudes of physicians towards ethical issues related to prescribing PrEP. Methods: The purpose of the present literature review was to evaluate provider attitudes toward the ethics of prescribing PrEP for individuals at risk of acquiring HIV infection. Searches of the PubMed and Cochrane databases were conducted. Three reviewers independently assessed the relevance of articles and discarded those not directly related to the attitudes of physicians toward ethics of the cost, safety, and resource allocation of PrEP. A total of twenty-one articles were included in the review. Results: Provider attitudes and perceptions focused on three areas: resource allocation, cost, and safety or effectiveness of PrEP. Providers who were hesitant in prescribing PrEP were concerned with the availability of resources, patient adherence, risk of drug resistance, and toxicity. In the studies reviewed, few providers had prescribed PrEP; however, prescribing practices trended upward with time and awareness. Conclusions: Realization of the benefits of PrEP will require a utilitarian ethical approach to identifying the populations that will benefit most, monitoring for adverse effects, addressing costs, and educating and training providers to prescribe PrEP responsibly. Ensuring that PrEP fulfills its potential as part of a combination regimen for HIV prevention requires identification of additional evidence, education, support services, and resources that are needed, as well as the regulatory framework and cost scenarios for access to PrEP.
医生对暴露前预防(PrEP)伦理的态度:成本、安全性和资源分配
背景:在美国,人类免疫缺陷病毒(HIV)仍然是一个重大的公共卫生问题。有证据表明,使用抗逆转录病毒药物,如暴露前预防(PrEP),可成为减少艾滋病毒感染新发病例的一种安全有效的初级预防战略。提供者的做法行为涉及到处方PrEP和对特定弱势群体的潜在影响,需要得到更多关注。很少有研究评估医生对处方PrEP相关伦理问题的态度。方法:本文献综述的目的是评估提供者对HIV感染风险个体处方PrEP的伦理态度。检索PubMed和Cochrane数据库。三位审稿人独立评估了文章的相关性,并丢弃了那些与医生对PrEP的成本、安全性和资源分配的伦理态度没有直接关系的文章。总共有21篇文章被纳入审查。结果:提供者的态度和看法集中在三个方面:资源分配、成本、PrEP的安全性或有效性。在开具PrEP处方时犹豫不决的提供者关注资源的可获得性、患者依从性、耐药风险和毒性。在审查的研究中,很少有提供者开PrEP;然而,处方实践随着时间和意识的增加呈上升趋势。结论:实现PrEP的益处需要一种实用的伦理方法,以确定受益最大的人群,监测不良影响,解决成本问题,并教育和培训提供者负责任地开PrEP。要确保PrEP作为艾滋病毒预防联合方案的一部分发挥其潜力,就需要确定所需的额外证据、教育、支持服务和资源,以及获得PrEP的监管框架和成本设想。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
10 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信