SciELO - Scientific Electronic Library Online

vol.40 issue4Comparison of the effectiveness and renal safety of tenofovir versus entecavir in patients with chronic hepatitis BReflection on the pharmaceutical service in nursing homes: understanding reality to cover needs author indexsubject indexarticles search
Home Pagealphabetic serial listing  

Services on Demand




Related links

  • On index processCited by Google
  • Have no similar articlesSimilars in SciELO
  • On index processSimilars in Google


Farmacia Hospitalaria

On-line version ISSN 2171-8695Print version ISSN 1130-6343


SANCHEZ-RUBIO FERRANDEZ, Javier  and  GROUP OF PHARMACEUTICAL CARE FOR HIV+ PATIENTS et al. Perceptions about HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis among healthcare professionals in Spain (PERPPRES Study). Farm Hosp. [online]. 2016, vol.40, n.4, pp.287-301. ISSN 2171-8695.

Objective: To determine the level of support, knowledge and perceptions of pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) by Infectious Disease Specialists and Hospital Pharmacists in Spain. Methods: Cross-sectional study through an on-line 31-item survey (sociodemographical data, employment status/experience, knowledge of PrEP, use, identified barriers and economic issues). A univariate analysis was performed to evaluate the variables associated with support for PrEP, and compare the assessments by Specialists and Pharmacists. The questions about support for PrEP and agreement with the indication approval were repeated after showing data from published studies. The significance of the change in the answers was analyzed using the McNemar Test. Results: 211 questionnaires were received (80.1% from Pharmacists). 40.3% had low/no familiarity with PrEP (46.2% Pharmacists vs. 16.7% Physicians; p < 0.01). A 53.6% of them would support the use of PrEP (49.7% Pharmacists vs. 69% Physicians; p = 0.038). The minimum acceptable efficacy in order to support PrEP was 85.0 ± 15.5% (82.6 ± 12.1% by Physicians vs. 85.6 ± 15.0% by Pharmacists; p = 0.02). The variables associated with support were: medical profession (OR = 2.26; 95%CI 1.1-4.6; p = 0.038) and lower demand for efficacy (difference = 10.5%; 95%CI 6.9 to 14.1; p < 0.001). After receiving the information, there was an increase in their support for use and indication approval. Most participants (81.5%) did not support its reimbursement. The main barriers identified were: an increase in risk behaviour (24.1%), increase in sexually transmitted diseases (19.0%), resistance (16.6%) and cost (16.0%). Conclusions: More than half of participants were familiar with PrEP. The majority of them would support its use and the approval of the indication, but would not reimburse it. The use of PrEP in real practice is currently low.

Keywords : Pre-exposure prophylaxis; HIV; Spain.

        · abstract in Spanish     · text in English | Spanish     · English ( pdf ) | Spanish ( pdf )


Creative Commons License All the contents of this journal, except where otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License