Acceptability and Predictors of Uptake of Anti-retroviral Pre-exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) Among Fishing Communities in Uganda: A Cross-Sectional Discrete Choice Experiment Survey
We used a discrete choice experiment to assess the acceptability and potential uptake of HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) among 713 HIV-negative members of fishing communities in Uganda. Participants were asked to choose between oral pill, injection, implant, condoms, vaginal ring (women), and men circumcision. Product attributes were HIV prevention effectiveness, sexually transmitted infection (STI) prevention, contraception, waiting time, and secrecy of use. Data were analysed using mixed multinomial logit and latent class models. HIV prevention effectiveness was viewed as the most important attribute. Both genders preferred oral PrEP. Women least preferred the vaginal ring and men the implant. Condom use was predicted to decrease by one third among men, and not to change amongst women. Oral PrEP and other new prevention technologies are acceptable among fishing communities and may have substantial demand. Future work should explore utility of multiple product technologies that combine contraception with HIV and other STI prevention.
KeywordsFisherfolk HIV prevention Discrete choice experiment Pre-exposure prophylaxis Uganda
MOK, DN, SB, AK, contributed to the study design. MOK, MQ, DN, SB developed the study tools, MOK, DN, KK, oversaw implementation of the study. MOK, DN, and KK, and AK oversaw the data collection. MOK, and MQ, did the data analysis. MOK, and MQ, wrote the first draft of the manuscript. All authors contributed to the interpretation of the results and revision of the manuscript for coherence, and intellectual content.
This study was funded by the Health Resources & Service Administration U91HA06801B) and University of Washington Center for AIDS Research (CFAR), an NIH funded program (P30 AI027757) which is supported by the following NIH Institutes and Centers (NIAID, NCI, NIMH, NIDA, NICHD, NHLBI, NIA). The International Partnership for Microbicides (IPM) provided dummy vaginal rings for demonstration purposes.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of interest
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
- 1.UNAIDS. Fact sheet: Global HIV statistics. 2017. http://www.unaids.org/sites/default/files/media_asset/UNAIDS_FactSheet_en.pdf.
- 5.Ministry of Health. National HIV Prevention Strategy 2011–2015. http://www.aidsuganda.org/images/documents/NPS.pdf.
- 14.Kibengo FM, Ruzagira E, Katende D, Bwanika AN, Bahemuka U, Haberer JE, et al. Safety, adherence and acceptability of intermittent tenofovir/emtricitabine as HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) among HIV-uninfected Ugandan volunteers living in HIV-serodiscordant relationships: a randomized, clinical trial. PLoS ONE. 2013;8(9):e74314.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 18.Uganda HIV/AIDS knowledge management communications capacity. Most at risk populations-fishing communities and HIV in Uganda: synthesis of information and evidence to inform the response. 2014.Google Scholar
- 19.Buchbinder SP, Glidden DV, Liu AY, McMahan V, Guanira JV, Mayer KH, et al. HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis in men who have sex with men and transgender women: a secondary analysis of a phase 3 randomised controlled efficacy trial. Lancet Infect Dis. 2014;14(6):468–75.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 24.Choopanya K, Martin M, Suntharasamai P, Sangkum U, Mock PA, Leethochawalit M, et al. Antiretroviral prophylaxis for HIV infection in injecting drug users in Bangkok, Thailand (the Bangkok Tenofovir Study): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial. The Lancet. 2013;381(9883):2083–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 26.McCormack S (ed) Pragmatic open-label randomised trial of preexposure prophylaxis: the PROUD study. Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections (CROI), Seattle, USA, abstract 22LB2015.Google Scholar
- 27.Ministry of Health Uganda. Consolidated guidelines for prevention and treatment of HIV in Uganda. 2016. https://aidsfree.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/uganda_hiv_gl_2016.pdf.
- 31.HIV Prevention Trials Network. HPTN: A phase 3 double blind safety and efficacy study of long-acting injectable Cabotegravir compared to daily oral TDF/FTC for pre-exposure prophylaxis in HIV-uninfected women. 2018. https://www.hptn.org/research/studies/hptn084.
- 34.Centre for Disease Control. Pre-exposure prophylaxis for the prevention of HIV INFECTION in the United States. 2014. http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/pdf/prepguidelines2014.pdf.
- 35.World Health Organization. Consolidated guidelines on general HIV care and the use of antiretroviral drugs for treating and preventing HIV infection: recommendations for a public health approach. 2013. http://www.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/85321/1/9789241505727_eng.pdf.
- 36.Baeten J, Celum C, editors. Antiretroviral pre-exposure prophylaxis for HIV-1 prevention among heterosexual African men and women: the Partners PrEP Study. 6th IAS Conference on HIV Pathogenesis, treatment and Prevention; 2011.Google Scholar
- 38.Ndase P, Celum C, Campbell J, Bukusi E, Kiarie J, Katabira E, et al. Successful discontinuation of the placebo arm and provision of an effective HIV prevention product after a positive interim efficacy result: the partners prep study experience. JAIDS J Acquir Immune Deficiency Syndr. 2014;66(2):206–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 41.AVAC Global advocacy for HIV prevention. Ongoing and planned PrEP trials and demonstration projects. 2013. http://www.prepwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/PrEP-Trials-and-Demo-Projects-December-2013.pdf.
- 43.Uganda Ministry of Agricultue, Animal Industry and Fisheries.(n.d). Departments: Fisheries Resources. http://www.agriculture.go.ug/index-page-departments-id-87.htm.
- 45.Kuteesa MO, Weiss HA, Abaas A, Nash S, Nsubuga RN, Newton R, et al. Feasibility of conducting HIV combination prevention interventions in fishing communities in Uganda: a cluster randomised trial. 2018.Google Scholar
- 47.Ager A, Stark L, Sparling T, Ager W. Rapid appraisal in humanitarian emergencies using participatory ranking methodology (PRM). New York: Program on Forced Migration and Health Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health; 2011.Google Scholar
- 48.ChoiceMetrics. Ngene version 1.1.2. Sydney, Australia. 2012.Google Scholar
- 51.Hess S, Bierlaire M, Polak JW. Estimation of value of travel-time savings using mixed logit models. Transp Res Part A. 2005;39(2–3):221–36.Google Scholar
- 58.Wagman JA, Gray RH, Campbell JC, Thoma M, Ndyanabo A, Ssekasanvu J, et al. Effectiveness of an integrated intimate partner violence and HIV prevention intervention in Rakai, Uganda: analysis of an intervention in an existing cluster randomised cohort. Lancet Glob Health. 2015;3(1):e23–33.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 63.Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS). The Gap Report. UNAIDS, Geneva, Switzerland. 2014. http://www.unaids.org/en/resources/documents/2014/20140716_UNAIDSgap_report.