Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2020 Nov 1.
Published in final edited form as: AIDS Behav. 2019 Nov;23(11):2966–2979. doi: 10.1007/s10461-019-02591-9

Table 3.

Current and potential PrEP users’ perceived barriers and facilitators to accessing PrEP in Birmingham, AL

Dimension of Access to Carea
(Definition)
Perceived
barrier or
facilitator
Major sub-themes
Approachability
(knowledge of the availability of services, which may vary by social or geographical groups)
Perceived
barrier(s)
  • Lack of awareness of PrEP and limited advertisement of PrEP within non-white communities and among non-MSM populations

Perceived
facilitator(s)
  • PrEP-related information sharing via internet, social media and close interpersonal connections

Acceptability
(the cultural and social factors that affect perceived appropriateness to seek out a service)
Perceived
barrier(s)
  • Cultural and social norms that silence discussion concerning sexuality

  • Fear and experiences of sexuality-related stigma

Perceived
facilitator(s)
  • Increased dialogue and visibility concerning PrEP in some social groups

Availability and accommodation
(the ability to access services both physically, and in a timely manner)
Perceived
barrier(s)
  • Long travel distances to access PrEP

  • Time conflicts with available PrEP clinic appointments

  • Repeated clinic visits needed to begin and receive cost assistance for PrEP

Perceived
facilitator(s)
  • Assistance from social support networks, employers, and others

Affordability
(the ability to pay for services)
Perceived
barrier(s)
  • High prescription and co-pay costs

  • Lack of awareness of financial assistance programs

  • Lack of resources for health insurance and cost-related challenges

Perceived
facilitator(s)
  • Financial and logistical support from assistance programs and clinic staff

  • Assistance from peer navigators

Appropriateness
(the fit between client needs and the services offered, including the type and quality of services provided)
Perceived
barrier(s)
  • Lack of awareness of PrEP by primary care and family practitioners

  • Preference for other modes of PrEP delivery (i.e., injectables)

  • Low perceived HIV risk relative to the resources required for PrEP use

  • Concern about side effects

Perceived
facilitator(s)
  • Interpersonal quality of interactions with PrEP providers

  • Self-motivation and treatment self-efficacy

a

As defined by Levesque et al. (2013)