Use of postexposure prophylaxis against HIV infection following sexual exposure does not lead to increases in high-risk behavior
- 1 March 2004
- journal article
- clinical trial
- Published by Wolters Kluwer Health in AIDS
- Vol. 18 (5) , 787-792
- https://doi.org/10.1097/00002030-200403260-00010
Abstract
The effectiveness of postexposure prophylaxis (PEP) following occupational exposure to HIV has prompted advocacy for PEP following sexual or drug-use exposures. To evaluate the concern that the availability of PEP for sexual or drug-use exposures might result in behavioral disinhibition. Non-randomized trial of 397 adults with high-risk sexual or drug-use exposures within the prior 72 h. Antiretroviral medication for 4 weeks and five counseling sessions. Participants were followed for 12 months for repeat request for PEP and for changes compared with pre-enrollment in overall high-risk behavior and the acquisition of sexually transmitted diseases (STD) and HIV. After 12 months following receipt of PEP, the majority of participants (83%) did not request a repeat course of PEP. At 12 months after exposure, 73% of participants reported a decrease compared with baseline in the number of times they had performed high-risk sexual acts; 13% reported no change, and 14% had an increase. Most participants (85%) had no change in the incidence of STD; 8.5% had a decrease and 6.8% an increase. Three homosexual men seroconverted for HIV (none associated with the presenting exposure) for a rate of 1.2/100 person-year, equivalent to rates in San Francisco among all homosexual men. After receipt of PEP consisting of antiretroviral medication and behavioral counseling following a potential sexual exposure to HIV, most individuals do not increase high-risk behavior. Coupled with prior safety and feasibility data, this lack of behavioral disinhibition suggests that use of PEP should be routinely considered following high-risk sexual exposures.Keywords
This publication has 10 references indexed in Scilit:
- Post-exposure prophylaxis after non-occupational HIV exposure: impact of recommendations on physicians’ experiences and attitudesAIDS, 2002
- Tolerability of Postexposure Prophylaxis with Zidovudine, Lamivudine, and Nelfinavir for Human Immunodeficiency Virus InfectionClinical Infectious Diseases, 2001
- Feasibility of Postexposure Prophylaxis (PEP) against Human Immunodeficiency Virus Infection after Sexual or Injection Drug Use Exposure: The San Francisco PEP StudyThe Journal of Infectious Diseases, 2001
- Survey of Nonoccupational HIV Postexposure Prophylaxis in Hospital Emergency DepartmentsJAIDS Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes, 2001
- Post-exposure prophylaxis after occupational and non-occupational exposures to HIV: An overview of the policies implemented in 27 European countriesAIDS Care, 2000
- Efficacy of Postexposure Prophylaxis after Intravaginal Exposure of Pig-Tailed Macaques to a Human-Derived Retrovirus (Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 2)Journal of Virology, 2000
- A Case–Control Study of HIV Seroconversion in Health Care Workers after Percutaneous ExposureNew England Journal of Medicine, 1997
- Coping effectiveness training for men living with HIV: Preliminary findingsInternational Journal of STD & AIDS, 1996
- Age and DepressionJournal of Health and Social Behavior, 1992
- The CES-D ScaleApplied Psychological Measurement, 1977