|
13th International AIDS ConferenceDurban, South Africa - July 9-July 14, 2000 |
Int Conf AIDS 2000 Jul 9-14; 13:(abstract no. TuOrC315)
Friedman RK, Rodrigues J, Fernandes MN, Moreira IR, Schechter M, Harrison L
R.K. Friedman, Projeto Praca XI - HIVNET/Brazil, Brazil, Tel.: +(55) 021 5701120, E-mail: Mark5@zipmail.com.br
BACKGROUND: Post-exposure chemoprophylaxis is a widely-used intervention for the prevention of HIV infection, particularly in the occupational setting. However, no data are available on the potential effectiveness of post-exposure chemoprophylaxis for the prevention of sexual transmission of HIV. The Post-Sexual-Exposure Chemoprophylaxis (PEP) Project, in Rio de Janeiro, was initiated in January, 1999. The target population is HIV seronegative homosexual men who participated in our HIV seroincidence study. The purpose of PEP is to identify behavioral changes, if any, that occur as a result of the study and to determine the acceptability, tolerability, and safety of post-exposure chemoprophylaxis.
METHODS: Study subjects enrolled answered questionnaires about to sexual behavioral and health and were given counseling on HIV prevention. Each participant received a 4-day supply of zidovidine and lamivudine (AZT/3TC) and was instructed to begin chemoprophylaxis immediately following high-risk exposures. Sex without protection, within 48 hours, in vaginal intercourse, insertive or receptive anal intercourse, with or without ejaculation and receptive oral intercourse with ejaculation were the criteria for the regimen. If the exposure was deemed fulfill the criteria, the participant received an additional 24-day supply of therapy.
RESULTS: As at December 31, 1999, 202 subjects had been recruited. One hundred twenty five (61.8%) reported exposure fulfillsing study criteria; 78 (38.6%) didn't initiated PEP. The regimen was initiated 53 times by 47 participants. Of these, 47 ( 88.7%) were considered to be eligible exposures. Among 47 who initiated PEP, no volunteer reported to use PEP instead of condoms. The main reasons for not to use PEP were stable partner (55.1%) and volunteers who ignored the risk (42.3%).
CONCLUSIONS: 1. Many exposures of risk occurred despite of counseling; 2. Criteria of the risk perception are subjective; 3. No volunteer reported preferring to the use of PEP over condoms.
Copyright © 2000 - International AIDS Society (IAS). Reproduction of this abstract (other than one copy for personal reference) must be cleared through the IAS.
