Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorBahikire1, Daraus
dc.contributor.authorNanyingi, Miisa
dc.contributor.authorAtuhairwe, Christine
dc.contributor.authorMatama, Catherine
dc.contributor.authorNinsiima, Lesley Rose
dc.contributor.authorBbuye, Mudarshiru
dc.date.accessioned2024-04-04T15:39:44Z
dc.date.available2024-04-04T15:39:44Z
dc.date.issued2023-11-08
dc.identifier.issn2296-2565
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2023.1116317
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12280/3103
dc.description.abstractThe use of non-occupational post-exposure prophylaxis (nPEP) to prevent HIV acquisition among those exposed as an approach to HIV prevention has expanded in Uganda. Although there are increased eorts to avail nPEP services among most at-risk populations, the usage of nPEP medicines remains low. Therefore, this study examined the risk perception and usage of non-occupational post-exposure prophylaxis (nPEP) among fisherfolk in the Ggulwe fishing parish, Bussi sub-county, Wakiso district. A cross-sectional study among adults was carried out from October 2020 to January 2021 in Ggulwe parish, Bussi sub-county, Wakiso district, to examine the usage of nPEP and factors influencing the usage. Data were collected using semi-structured questionnaires, and key informants’ interviews were conducted among healthcare providers and the local leadership. The quantitative data were summarized using bivariate and multivariate logistic regression, while the qualitative data were analyzed thematically to enrich the quantitative results. Overall, 248 fisherfolk encountered an event that required the use of nPEP, and of these, 55/248 (22.2%) were able to use nPEP to prevent them from acquiring HIV. The usage of nPEP among adults in the Bussi sub-county, Wakiso district, was associated with not knowing that HIV can be prevented using nPEP medicines (AOR:0.1, 95% CI 0.03–0.36, p < 0.001), lack of knowledge of the existence of nPEP (AOR: 0.3, 95% CI 0.13–0.76, p = 0.01), the perception that nPEP can eectively prevent HIV infection after exposure (AOR 0.0586, 95% CI: 0.0177–0.1944, p < 0.001), and the community’s opinion aecting the willingness to take nPEP (AOR 0.1924, 95% CI: 0.0380–0.9727, p = 0.0462). The usage of nPEP among fisherfolk was low (22.2%). The low usage of nPEP was associated with a lack of knowledge and awareness about nPEP. This eort to improve the usage of nPEP should include community sensitization and HIV infection prevention using nPEP to raise awareness about HIV infection exposures and the risk of HIV infection during non-occupational exposuren_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherFrontiersen_US
dc.relation.ispartofseriesFrontiers in Public Health;Volume 11 - 2023
dc.subjectPost exposure prophylaxisen_US
dc.subjectHIVen_US
dc.subjectUgandaen_US
dc.subjectQuantitative data collection and analysisen_US
dc.subjectQualitative data collection and analysisen_US
dc.subjectFishing folksen_US
dc.subjectPerceptionen_US
dc.subjectUsageen_US
dc.titleRisk perception and usage of non-occupational post-exposure prophylaxis among fisherfolk in Ggulwe parish on the shores of Lake Victoria in central Ugandaen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record