Abstract
This study aimed to evaluate the implementation of HIV post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) guidelines and determine its clinical outcome in a PEPFAR (APIN-CDC) Clinic in south-eastern Nigeria from 2008 to 2012. It was a retrospective review of data of patients who accessed HIV PEP services from the clinic. Data on demographic and clinical characteristics of patients were retrieved from the database of the clinic and analyzed. Descriptive statistics and Chi-square test were applied to analyzed data at significance level of p<0.05. The result showed that thirty three (33) individuals were enrolled into PEP during the period. Thirty-one (31; 93.94%) were due to occupational exposure, while two (2; 6.06%) were due to non-occupational exposure. AZT+3TC 23 (69.70%), AZT+3TC+LPV/r 9 (27.27%) and AZT+3TC+ATV/r+RTV 1 (3.03%) were the ARVs used. The nature of exposure did not significantly determine the choice of the ARV. The study concludes that APIN/CDC Clinic, UNTH Enugu substantially followed recommendations of standard guidelines in HIV PEP management, but the absence of follow-up test results for majority of the enrollees was an impediment to any general statement on its clinical outcome. Key words: HIV, post-exposure prophylaxis, Nigeria.
Highlights
Post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) generally refers to the medical response given to prevent the transmission of blood-borne pathogens after a potential exposure (WHO, 2007)
The result of the study indicates that the APIN-Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Clinic UNTH, Enugu used three ART regimens for post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) patients, viz.: AZT+3TC (23; 69.70%), AZT+3TC+LPV/r (9; 27.27%) and AZT+3TC+ATV/r +RTV (1; 3.03%) (Table 2)
The result of this study revealed that only one enrollee had the three post-PEP therapy HIV antibody tests conducted for
Summary
Post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) generally refers to the medical response given to prevent the transmission of blood-borne pathogens after a potential exposure (WHO, 2007). In relation to HIV, it refers to a set of services provided to manage specific aspect of exposure to HIV and prevent the transmission of HIV in cases where exposure occurs (WHO, 2007) after occupational injuries (Department of Health, 2004) or sexual exposure (Fisher et al, 2006). PEP was commenced in the early 1990s for occupational exposures such as needle stick or cuts and has since been expanded to include all other means of exposure to HIV infection (WHO, 2007). It is noteworthy that 99.7% of needle sticks do not result in actual transmission of HIV infection (Becker, 1989)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
