Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31813837›Full record

ArticleThe lancet. HIV2020

Pre-exposure prophylaxis uptake and early continuation among pregnant and post-partum women within maternal and child health clinics in Kenya: results from an implementation programme.

John Kinuthia, Jillian Pintye, Felix Abuna, Kenneth K Mugwanya, Harison Lagat, Dickens Onyango, Emily Begnel, Julia Dettinger, Jared M Baeten, Grace John-Stewart and 1 more

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The lancet. HIV, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 119 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
119citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
10.0field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

119 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 165 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial

59 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

John KinuthiaDepartment of Global Health, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA; Department of Research & Programs, Kenyatta National Hospital, Nairobi, Kenya. Electronic address: kinuthia@uw.edu.
Jillian PintyeDepartment of Global Health, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
Felix AbunaUniversity of Washington-Kenya, Nairobi, Kenya.
Kenneth K MugwanyaDepartment of Global Health, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
Harison LagatUniversity of Washington-Kenya, Nairobi, Kenya.
Dickens OnyangoKisumu County Department of Health, Kisumu, Kenya.
Emily BegnelDepartment of Global Health, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
Julia DettingerDepartment of Global Health, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
Jared M BaetenDepartment of Global Health, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA; Department of Epidemiology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA; Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
Grace John-StewartDepartment of Global Health, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA; Department of Epidemiology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA; Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA; Department of Pediatrics, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
PrEP Implementation for Young Women and Adolescents (PrIYA) programme
University of Washington · USGreat Lakes University of Kisumu · KEUniversity of Nairobi · KE

Funding

University of Washington/Fred Hutch Center for AIDS ResearchP30AI027757 · NIAID · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI EDWIN ROBERTO ORELLANA · 1988 to 2026
$104.9M
A differentiated care model to improve the efficiency of PrEP delivery in KenyaR00MH118134 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI MUGWANYA, KENNETH KIGGUNDU · 2019 to 2021
$743k
NIAID NIH HHS P30 AI027757NIMH NIH HHS R00 MH118134
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPregnant women in settings with high HIV prevalence are at increased risk of HIV acquisition and subsequent vertical transmission. We implemented and evaluated a novel programme to provide pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) in maternal and child health clinics in Kenya.

methodsIn collaboration with Kisumu County Department of Health, we integrated PrEP delivery within 16 maternal and child health clinics in Kisumu County (Kenya). Women and girls older than 15 years seeking maternal and child health services who tested HIV negative at that visit or within a month and were willing to receive PrEP counselling were interviewed to assess for HIV behavioural risk factors and offered PrEP. Correlates of PrEP initiation and continuation were assessed using Poisson regression in univariate and multivariate analyses. Potential correlates included in our analyses were age, marital status, marriage type, whether pregnant or post partum, gestational age (if pregnant), and HIV risk factors in the previous 6 months. Reasons for the decision to discontinue after having decided to initiate PrEP were evaluated. Women who initiated PrEP were followed up 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months after initiation.

findingsBetween Nov 20, 2017, and June 13, 2018, 9376 pregnant and post-partum women were assessed for behavioural risk factors and willingness to initiate PrEP. Overall, 2030 (21·7%) initiated PrEP, and 2027 had the status of their partner captured (153 [79·3%] of 193 women with partners living with HIV, 1178 [37·2%] of 3165 women with partners of unknown HIV status, and 696 [11·6%] of 5997 women with HIV-negative partners). Predictors of PrEP initiation in the multivariate analysis were: being younger than 24 years (adjusted prevalence ratio 1·14, 95% CI 1·02-1·28); having a partner living with HIV (6·96, 5·46-8·89) or of unknown HIV status (3·08, 2·50-3·81); gestational age of less than 26 weeks (1·22, 1·02-1·47); having been diagnosed or treated for a sexually transmitted infection (1·57, 1·20-2·06); having been forced to have sex (1·82, 1·38-2·42); having experienced intimate partner violence during the previous 6 months (1·65, 1·10-2·48); having shared needles while engaging in injection drug use (2·43, 1·69-3·50); and recurrent use of post-exposure prophylaxis (1·96, 1·36-2·82). Overall, 786 (38·7%) of 2030 women who initiated PrEP continued use after the first month, with 104 (68·0%) of 153 women who had a partner living with HIV continuing use. Having a partner living with HIV was the only predictor of PrEP continuation at 1 month in the multivariable model (1·98, 1·54-2·55). Frequent reasons for discontinuation were side effects and low HIV risk perception. No incident HIV infection was reported among women on PrEP.

interpretationMany women attending maternal and child health clinics had risk factors for HIV and elected to use PrEP, indicating that routinely accessed maternal and child health clinics can be an effective platform for PrEP delivery for young women. As PrEP awareness rises, PrEP provision in routine clinical settings such as maternal and child health facilities might contribute to decreased HIV incidence among young women.

fundingUS Department of State.

Indexed as

AdolescentAmbulatory CareAnti-HIV AgentsChild HealthFemaleHIV InfectionsHumansInfectious Disease Transmission, VerticalKenyaMalePostpartum PeriodPre-Exposure ProphylaxisPregnancyPregnant PeopleYoung AdultAnti-HIV Agents

Identifiers

PMID31813837
PMCPMC11498332
OpenAlexW2993668023

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.