Skip to main content
. 2021 May 21;9(2):E529–E538. doi: 10.9778/cmajo.20200198

Table 2:

Factors associated with not using pre-exposure prophylaxis among self-reported HIV-negative or unknown participants for whom pre-exposure prophylaxis was clinically recommended and who were aware of pre-exposure prophylaxis

Factor Univariable analysis, OR (95% CI)*
n = 1032–1100
Multivariable analysis, adjusted OR (95% CI)*
n = 987
Sociodemographic characteristics
Age, yr
 ≥ 30 Reference Reference
 < 30 2.10 (1.56–2.82) 1.13 (0.74–1.74)
Education
 More than high school Reference Reference
 High school or less 1.83 (1.08–3.34) 1.35 (0.64–3.00)
Income, $
 ≥ 30 000 Reference Reference
 < 30 000 1.62 (1.21–2.18) 1.02 (0.65–1.58)
In a relationship with a main partner
 No Reference Reference
 Yes 2.20 (1.63–2.97) 1.85 (1.21–2.86)
Prevention strategies related to sexual behaviour
Viral load sorting as HIV prevention strategy
 Yes Reference Reference
 No 3.12 (2.22–4.38) 1.51 (0.93–2.46)
Dimensions related to perceiving need for care
Perceived risk of HIV infection
“I don’t feel that I am at high enough risk to use PrEP”
 Strongly disagree/disagree/neutral Reference Reference
 Agree/strongly agree 7.88 (5.13–12.69) 6.20 (3.61–11.10)
“HIV/AIDS is a less serious threat than it used to be because of new treatments”
 Strongly agree/agree Reference Reference
 Disagree/strongly disagree 1.91 (1.39–2.63) 1.42 (0.89–2.27)
Knowledge about pre-exposure prophylaxis
“I know enough about PrEP to tell if it’s right for me or not”
 Strongly agree/agree/neutral Reference Reference
 Disagree/strongly disagree 2.70 (1.82–4.12) 2.33 (1.37–4.05)
Perceived effectiveness of PrEP at preventing HIV infection
 Completely/very Reference Reference
 Moderately/a little/not at all/no opinion 8.44 (5.34–14.12) 3.97 (2.23–7.38)
“New drug therapies make people less infectious with HIV”
 Strongly agree/agree Reference Reference
 Disagree/strongly disagree 2.52 (1.70–3.86) 1.34 (0.75–2.42)
Dimensions related to seeking care
Impact of pre-exposure prophylaxis use on sexual behaviour
“I will choose my sexual partners based on whether they are taking PrEP or not”
 Strongly agree/agree/neutral Reference Reference
 Disagree/strongly disagree 1.48 (1.10–1.98) 1.56 (1.02–2.41)
“If I was taking PrEP, I would most likely stop using condoms”
 Strongly agree/agree/neutral Reference Reference
 Disagree/strongly disagree 2.69 (1.94–3.78) 1.99 (1.27–3.14)
“I am afraid that guys being on PrEP will stop using other ways of protecting themselves”
 Strongly disagree/disagree/neutral Reference Reference
 Agree/strongly agree 1.93 (1.40–2.65) 1.00 (0.63–1.59)
Dimensions related to accessing and paying for care
Access to health care services
Told primary health care provider about male partners
 Yes Reference Reference
 No 5.68 (3.38–10.14) 3.30 (1.68–6.76)
 No primary care provider 3.65 (2.62–5.13) 2.66 (1.65–4.35)
Has medication insurance
 Yes Reference Reference
 No 3.21 (2.26–4.65) 3.10 (1.91–5.12)
“I don’t think I can find a doctor that is sensitive and accepting enough of my sexual activities and choices to prescribe PrEP”
 Strongly disagree/disagree/neutral Reference Reference
 Agree/strongly agree 7.27 (3.27–20.57) 5.22 (2.00–16.64)
“I know where to go to get a prescription for PrEP”
 Strongly agree/agree/neutral Reference Reference
 Disagree/strongly disagree 4.13 (2.84–6.19) 1.63 (0.97–2.76)
“I have not sought a prescription for PrEP in the past because of the cost of the medication”
 Strongly disagree/disagree/neutral Reference Reference
 Agree/strongly agree 1.43 (1.06–1.94) 1.55 (1.00–2.41)
Dimensions related to engaging in care
Implications of ongoing use of pre-exposure prophylaxis
“I am worried about the short- and long-term side effects of taking PrEP”
 Strongly disagree/disagree/neutral Reference Reference
 Agree/strongly agree 2.19 (1.63–2.94) 1.81 (1.18–2.79)
“I don’t like the idea of being required to go to the regular medical follow-up visits involved in taking PrEP”
 Strongly disagree/disagree/neutral Reference Reference
 Agree/strongly agree 3.03 (1.94–4.94) 1.23 (0.67–2.31)
City and year of recruitment
City
 Vancouver Reference Reference
 Toronto 1.03 (0.70–1.53) 1.42 (0.81–2.52)
 Montréal 1.49 (1.07–2.08) 1.07 (0.62–1.86)
Year
 2019 Reference Reference
 2018 1.37 (0.94 –2.00) 1.96 (1.09–3.52)
 2017 2.26 (1.48–3.43) 1.97 (1.01–3.87)

Note: CI = confidence interval, OR = odds ratio, PrEP = pre-exposure prophylaxis.

*

All estimates are respondent-driven sampling (RDS)-adjusted.

Other variables that were explored included sexual orientation, ethnicity, other HIV prevention strategies (seropositioning, serosorting, PrEP, withdrawal), impact of PrEP use on sexual behaviour (“PrEP would allow me to have the sex I want,” “If a guy is using PrEP it makes using condoms during anal sex less important”), community receptivity of PrEP (“PrEP is well-perceived in the community,” “I am worried about being negatively judged for taking PrEP”), access to health care services (ease of accessing PrEP, “Clinics where I could get PrEP are too far away,” “Most doctors do not know enough about PrEP to be comfortable prescribing it”), implications of ongoing use of pre-exposure prophylaxis (“I would have difficulty taking PrEP medication every day”), HIV treatment optimism–skepticism scale,45 Collective Self-esteem Scale,46 Sexual Compulsivity Scale,47 sexual altruism scale48,49 and Condom Barriers Scale.50