Knowledge and attitudes about HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis

Evidence from in-depth interviews and focus group discussions with policy makers, healthcare providers, and end-users in Lesotho

Bibliographic Data

ID19591638
AuthorsPascal Geldsetzer (0000-0002-8878-5505, Chan Zuckerberg Initiative (United States), corresponding author), Joy J Chebet (0000-0001-8810-2105, University of Arizona), Tapiwa Tarumbiswa (Ministry of Health), Rosina Phate-Lesihla (Ministry of Health), Chivimbiso Maponga (0000-0002-6877-8316, Clinton Health Access Initiative), Esther Mandara (Clinton Health Access Initiative), Till Bärnighausen (0000-0002-4182-4212, Heidelberg University), Shannon A Mcmahon (0000-0002-8634-9283, Johns Hopkins University)
EditorsJulia Robinson (0000-0003-0719-3995)
Year2022
Volume2
Issue10
Pagese0000762
Publication date2022-10-03
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenuePLOS Global Public Health (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 2767-3375 • E-ISSN: 2767-3375
PublisherPublic Library of Science (PLoS) (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1371/journal.pgph.0000762
PMID36962565
OpenAlexW4300773784
LanguageEN
Citations received3
References cited31

Studies on knowledge and attitudes about HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) have mostly focused on key populations in North America and Europe. To inform Lesotho’s national rollout of PrEP to the general population, this study aimed to characterize knowledge and attitudes about PrEP among policy makers, implementing partners, healthcare providers, and PrEP end-users in Lesotho. Respondents were purposively selected to participate based on personal experience in the development and implementation of Lesotho’s PrEP program, or the personal use of PrEP. We conducted 106 in-depth interviews with policy makers (n = 5), implementing partners (n = 4), and end-users (current PrEP users = 55; former PrEP users = 36; and PrEP “decliners” = 6). In addition, we held 11 focus group discussions (FGDs) with a total of 105 healthcare providers. Interview and FGD transcripts were analyzed following the tenets of Grounded Theory. Respondents expressed positive attitudes toward PrEP, owing to experienced and perceived personal, familial, and societal benefits. PrEP was viewed as i) an opportunity for serodiscordant couples to remain together, ii) a means of conceiving children with minimized risk of HIV infection, iii) providing a sense of agency and control, and iv) an avenue for addressing the HIV epidemic in Lesotho. Respondents demonstrated understanding of PrEP’s intended use, eligibility requirements, and modality of use. However, respondents also reported that several important misconceptions of PrEP were common among adults in Lesotho, including a belief that PrEP protects against sexually transmitted infections other than HIV, promotes promiscuity, prevents pregnancy, causes seroconversion, and provides lifelong protection from taking the pill just once. In addition to building on the perceived advantages of PrEP to shape a positive message, Lesotho’s national rollout of PrEP will likely benefit from a communication strategy that specifically addresses the common misconceptions of PrEP identified in this study

Business · Family medicine · Focus group · Health care · Knowledge management · Political science · Public relations · Computer Science · HIV, Drug Use, Sexual Risk · HIV/AIDS Research and Interventions · Medicine · Psychology · Sex work and related issues · Marketing

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access