Utilization of Post Exposure Prophylaxis among HIV Exposed Health Care Workers and Nonoccupational Exposure at Tikur Anbessa Specialized Hospital, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 2017- 2021 G.C
No Thumbnail Available
Date
2021-12
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Addis Abeba University
Abstract
Background: -HIV is a major global public health issue, having claimed 38 million lives so far.Ethiopia
is one of the most seriously affected countries in sub-Saharan Africa, with many people living with
HIV/AIDS. HIV infection in health care facilities has become a significant health problem, especially in
resource-poor settings.Health care workers are at risk of many diseases in health setups. There is a small
but definite occupational risk of HIV transmission to health care workers. PEP is recommended to
prevent the transmission of pathogens after potential exposure and further development of infection.If
started soon after exposure, PEP can reduce the risk of HIV infection by over 80%.Although studies
have found that awareness of PEP, no publication assesses utilization practice and subsequent follow-up
in our institution.
Objective: -To evaluate post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) utilization among HIV-exposed health care
workers and nonoccupational exposures at Tikur Anbessa Specialized Hospital (TASH)Antiretroviral
Treatment (ART) clinic from January 1, 2017- July 30, 2021.
Methods: -We conducted a retrospective cross-sectional study by reviewing the PEP registry book from
January 1, 2017- to July 30, 2021, and follow-up data is collected by interviewing the exposed case.
Data were entered using SPSS version 26, and descriptive analysis was done.
Result: -A total of 353 cases of occupational and nonoccupational exposure were reported to the
ARTclinic; PEP was prescribed for 352 subjects with an average of 77 subjects/year. The mean age of
the study participant was 27.3 ±7., the majority (57.2%) was male, Most (86.7%) of the exposure was
occupational, 27% of occupational exposure was reported by residents, followed by nurses 26.1%. Of
the occupational exposure, 30.4% were from different wards, followed by emergency, OPD (17.1%),
andoperatingtheater (7. 2%). Of nonoccupational exposure, 48.9% of cases were due to sexual assault.
Most (42.7%) of the exposure risk type was EC2 code type followed by EC3 code type (37.6%). The
source patient HIV status was unknown in 65.9% for nonoccupational and 30% for occupational
exposure. Two drugs (TDF/3TC) regimen was prescribed for 87.8% of cases. Over 90% of the
exposures were reported within 24hrs of the incident, and 45.2% of the exposed cases had an adverse
reaction. No seroconversions were reported.
Conclusion
In TASH,the ART clinic risk assessment, PEP initiation followed the national occupational and
nonoccupational exposures guideline. The type of regimen selected was a case-by-case analysis, and
there was more PEP request among the occupational exposure during the months between July to
December.
Recommendation
We recommend providers should follow the exposed individuals within 48 hours, and ongoing followup,
either
by
telephone
call
or,
if
possible,
in
person,
to
assess
PEP
tolerability
and
adherence.
Description
Keywords
Post-exposure prophylaxis,HIV transmission,Health care workers