KNOWLEDGE AND UTILIZATION OF HIV POST EXPOSURE 

PROPHYLAXIS AMONG UNIVERSITY OF NAIROBI STUDENTS

NGOMBO BENSON KITHIU29/2010/2010

SUPERVISOR: PROF. FN. KAMAUOCTOBER 2014

INTRODUCTION

• Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) has contributed to a high proportion of morbidity and mortality in the world

• Post Exposure Prophylaxis is intended to prevent sero conversion after exposure to potential risk factors

• Commonly accepted means of HIV prevention for healthcare personnel

• Non-occupational HIV/PEP typically employed after:• Sexual assault, consensual sex, needle stick injuries to

at-risk individuals who are not healthcare personnel

STUDY JUSTIFICATION• The extent and appropriateness of Non-

occupational post exposure prophylaxis (NPEP) utilization in Kenya is not known

• No specific guidelines in Kenya identified for non occupational exposure to HIV risk factors

• There is need for these services to be extended to students

• It is also hoped that information obtained from the study will be used by the university to improve on the strategies that will mitigate the impact of HIV/AIDS among students

AIDS (Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome)

OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDYGeneral objective

• To determine HIV-PEP awareness and utilization among University of Nairobi studentsSpecific objectives

• To determine level of knowledge on HIV PEP among University of Nairobi students• Determine the level of utilization of PEP services by

University of Nairobi students• Establish factors associated with utilization of PEP

among students• Identify support measures offered to students seeking

HIV PEP

METHODOLOGY• Study site: University of Nairobi• Sample size: 202 students• Data analysis: Microsoft Office Excel 2007

TABLE 1: NUMBER OF RESPONDENTS PER COLLEGE

College Selected number of students

College of Agriculture & Veterinary Sciences 33

College of Architecture & Engineering 33

College of Biological & Physical Sciences 34

College of Education & External Studies 34

College of Health Sciences 34

College of Humanities and Social Sciences 34

METHODOLOGY CONT…• Students who had been in the university for six months

and above, aged 18-38 years• Purposive sampling was used to select study units• A self-administered questionnaire containing open and

closed ended questions was used• It contained three sections:• Section A with demographic information, Section B

knowledge and Section C utilization• KNH/UON-Ethics & Research Committee was sought• Consent from respondent was obtained

KNH-Kenyatta National HospitalUON-University of Nairobi

RESULTS

SECTION A: • TABLE 2: SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHIC DATA

Frequency Percentage

Age 18-27 202 100%

Sex Male 139 68.80%

Female 63 31.20%

Year of study First 52 25.70%

Second 82 40.60%

Third 68 33.70%

RESULTS CONT…SECTION B: KNOWLEDGE ABOUT POST EXPOSURE PROPHYLAXIS (PEP)

• TABLE 3: HEARD ANY INFORMATION ABOUT HIV-PEP

• TABLE 4: CORRECT MEANING OF HIV-PEP

Frequency Percentage

Yes 137 67.80%

No 65 32.20%

Total 202 100%

Meaning of PEP Frequency Percentage

Yes 76 55.47%

No 61 44.53%

RESULTS CONT…SECTION C: UTILIZATION OF POST EXPOSURE PROPHYLAXIS

• FIGURE 1: EXPOSURE TO HIV RISK FACTORS

• 21% (43) respondents had been exposed to risk factors for HIV infection

RESULTS CONT…• FIGURE 2: REPORTING OF EXPOSURES (N=43)

• Only 19% (8) out of 43 exposures were reported

RESULTS CONT…• FIGURE 3: REASONS FOR NOT REPORTING THE ACCIDENTAL

EXPOSURE TO PEP UNIT (N=35).

RESULTS CONT…• FIGURE 4: SUPPORTIVE MEASURES OFFERED TO STUDENTS EXPOSED TO

HIV RISK FACTORS (N=202)

Counseling and testing -main supportive measure offered;74%(149)

DISCUSSION• 65 (32.2%) out of the 202 respondents lacked

information on PEP• 61 (44.5%) out of the 137 who had information on PEP

did not know the correct meaning of PEP• This means there is lack of information regarding PEP

protocol; including the correct time to obtain PEP• The reasons for not utilizing PEP services; respondent

thought was not at risk of contracting HIV infection, no signs of HIV from source, did not want to do HIV test and did not know how and who to report to

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDETIONSConclusion

• Low level of knowledge on HIV-PEP• The level of utilization of PEP services was also low• Most students fail to report exposure to potential HIV

risk factorsRecommendations

• Formulation of a clear PEP policy by the university• Offer peer counseling services to students• Creation of awareness on PEP• Provision of youth friendly services to students exposed

to risk factors