Use your browser's BACK button to return to your page of origin.
Experience of healthcare workers taking postexposure prophylaxis
after occupational human immunodeficiency virus exposures: findings of
the HIV Postexposure Prophylaxis Registry.
Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology 2000;21(12):780-785.
Wang SA, Panlilio AL, Doi PA, White AD, Stek M, Saah A, the HIV PEP Registry
Group.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To collect information about the safety of taking antiretroviral
drugs for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) postexposure prophylaxis (PEP).
DESIGN: A voluntary, confidential registry. SETTING: Hospital occupational
health clinics, emergency departments, private physician offices, and health
departments in the United States. RESULTS: 492 healthcare workers (HCWs)
who had occupational exposures to HIV, were prescribed HIV PEP, and agreed
to be enrolled in the registry by their healthcare providers were prospectively
enrolled in the registry. Three hundred eight (63%) of 492 of the PEP regimens
prescribed for these HCWs consisted of at least three antiretroviral agents.
Of the 449 HCWs for whom 6-week follow-up was available, 195 (43%) completed
the PEP regimen as initially prescribed. Forty-four percent (n=197) of HCWs
discontinued all PEP drugs and did not complete a PEP regimen. Thirteen percent
(n=57) discontinued > or =1 drug or modified drug dosage or added a drug
but did complete a course of PEP Among the 254 HCWs who modified or discontinued
the PEP regimen, the two most common reasons for doing so were because of
adverse effects attributed to PEP (54%) and because the source-patient turned
out to be HIV-negative (38%). Overall, 340 (76%) HCWs with 6-week follow-up
reported some symptoms while on PEP: nausea (57%), fatigue or malaise (38%),
headache (18%), vomiting (16%), diarrhea (14%), and myalgias or arthralgias
(6%). The median time from start of PEP to onset of each of the five most
frequently reported symptoms was 3 to 4 days. Only 37 (8%) HCWs with 6-week
follow-up were reported to have laboratory abnormalities; review of the reported
abnormalities revealed that most were unremarkable. Serious adverse events
were reported to the registry for 6 HCWs; all but one event resolved by the
6-month follow-up visit. Fewer side effects were reported by HCWs taking
two-drug PEP regimens than by HCWs taking three-drug PEP regimens. CONCLUSIONS:
Side effects from HIV PEP were very common but were rarely severe or serious.
The nature and frequency of HIV PEP toxicity were consistent with information
already available on the use of these antiretroviral agents. Clinicians prescribing
HIV PEP need to counsel HCWs about PEP side effects and should know how to
manage PEP toxicity when it arises.