Implementing PrEP Services in Diverse Health Care Settings

Background:Uptake of pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) in the US has been limited. Evidence for why and how PrEP has been successfully integrated into some clinical settings, but not in others is minimal. To address this gap, we conducted a qualitative study to identify contextual factors that facilitated and challenged the implementation of PrEP services.Setting:In partnership with the NYC Department of Health, we convened a planning committee with expertise with groups highly affected by the HIV epidemic employed in diverse health care settings, to guide the project. Representatives from programs within New York were targeted for participation initially and subsequently expanded nationally to enhance diversity in program type.Methods:Using an interview guide informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, we conducted 20 interviews with participants who successfully implemented PrEP programs in different settings (eg, primary care, emergency department, sexual health clinics), using different delivery models. We used template and matrix analysis to identify and characterize contextual determinants and implementation strategies.Results:Participants frequently described determinants and strategies fluidly and conceptualized them in context-specific terms. Commonly discussed Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research constructs included implementation climate (tension for change, compatibility, relatively priority), stakeholders' knowledge (or lack thereof) and beliefs about PrEP, and costs associated with PrEP implementation.Conclusion:Our work identifies patterns in PrEP program implementation, describing how organizations dealt with determinants in their own context. Our research points to the need to connect rigorous implementation research with how frontline implementers conceptualize their work to inform and improve PrEP implementation.