Skip to main content
Download PDF

Using the andersen healthcare utilization model to assess willingness to screen for prep in pharmacy-based settings among cisgender sexually minoritized men: results from the 2020 american men’s internet survey

BMC Public Health volume 24, Article number: 2349 (2024) Cite this article

Abstract

Background

Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) to prevent HIV is severely underutilized among sexually minoritized men (SMM). Inequitable access to PrEP-prescribing facilities and providers is a critical barrier to PrEP uptake among SMM. Integrating HIV prevention services, such as PrEP screening, into pharmacy-based settings is a viable solution to addressing HIV inequities in the US. We aimed to examine willingness to obtain PrEP screening in a pharmacy and its associated correlates, leveraging Andersen’s Healthcare Utilization Model (AHUM), among a national sample of SMM in the U.S.

Methods

Data from the 2020 American Men’s Internet Survey, an annual online survey among SMM, were analyzed. Drawing on AHUM-related constructs, we used a modified stepwise Poisson regression with robust variance estimates to examine differences in willingness to screen for PrEP in a pharmacy. Estimated prevalence ratios (PR) were calculated with 95% confidence intervals (CI95%).

Results

Out of 10,816 men, most (76%) were willing to screen for PrEP in a pharmacy. Participants were more willing to screen for PrEP in a pharmacy if they (1) had a general willingness to use PrEP (PR = 1.52; CI95% =1.45, 1.59); (2) felt comfortable speaking with pharmacy staff about PrEP (PR = 2.71; CI95% =2.47, 2.98); and (3) had HIV-related concerns (PR = 1.04; CI95% =1.02, 1.06). There were no observed differences in men’s willingness to screen for PrEP in a pharmacy by race/ethnicity, education level, annual household income, nor insurance status.

Conclusions

Strategically offering PrEP screening in pharmacies could mitigate access-related barriers to HIV prevention services among SMM, particularly across various sociodemographic domains. Importantly, this approach has vitally important implications for addressing broader inequities in HIV prevention. Future studies should examine strategies to successfully integrate PrEP screenings in pharmacies among diverse populations, especially among those at elevated risk for HIV.

Peer Review reports

Introduction

The HIV epidemic in the U.S. disproportionately affects populations at an increased risk of its acquisition and transmission, particularly cisgender sexually minoritized men (SMM), people who inject drugs, and transgender women. In 2021, SMM accounted for approximately 70% of all new HIV diagnoses, constituting 63% of all people with HIV nationwide.

Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) stands as one of the most effective tools in preventing HIV. Taken daily, it can substantially reduce the risk of acquiring HIV, up to 99% [1]. Despite its effectiveness, PrEP remains severely underutilized, especially among groups who might benefit from it the most, especially racially and sexually minoritized individuals. Disturbingly, 2020 data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) indicate that less than 25% of the 1.2 million people who could have benefited from PrEP actually received a prescription [2]. Furthermore, racial inequities in PrEP uptake persist, with Black Americans being more than seven times less likely to have obtained a PrEP prescription compared to their White counterparts in 2022 [3]. At the intersection of race and sexuality, studies underscore compounded inequities in PrEP uptake among Black SMM (BSMM), where recent data shows that only 26% were on PrEP as compared to 42% of White SMM [4].

Structural barriers play a critical role in impeding PrEP utilization, notably through inequitable access to PrEP-prescribing facilities and providers [5,6,7]. For example, studies reveal that a considerable proportion of PrEP-eligible SMM reside in areas termed “PrEP deserts,” where the nearest PrEP provider is at least a 30-minute drive away [6]. Harrington and colleagues’ recent geospatial analysis illustrates that areas with the highest HIV incidence rates, particularly in the US Southeast, notably lack PrEP-prescribing clinics [5]. Further, traditional healthcare providers, including many primary care physicians, often lack the awareness and knowledge of PrEP, posing a barrier to prescribing it, especially for populations at increased risk of HIV acquisition such as SMM [8, 9].

To address these access barriers, integrating HIV prevention services such as PrEP screenings into pharmacies emerges as a promising, yet underexplored strategy [10]. Pharmacies boast high accessibility, with most Americans residing within 5 miles of one; people generally visit them about three times a month; and, most have extended operating hours beyond those of traditional healthcare facilities [10]. It has also been documented that pharmacies—particularly community pharmacies—are generally located in areas that experience the highest burden of HIV. Indeed, Harrington and colleagues project that the accessibility of HIV prevention resources, including PrEP, could experience an eightyfold increase if pharmacies were equipped to offer these services [5]. Lastly, many US pharmacy students receive didactic training in HIV prevention services [11]; and, practicing pharmacists exhibit high levels of willingness to provide these services, especially for SMM [12, 13], further positioning pharmacy-based settings as a robust and innovative approach to improve PrEP access and uptake.

While a rapidly growing body of literature has explored the role of pharmacies in enhancing HIV prevention and treatment outcomes [10], extant literature exhibits limitations. Notably, most studies involve small, predominately white community samples, limiting the generalizability of findings. Furthermore, to our knowledge, only one study has assessed willingness to use HIV prevention services in a pharmacy setting among a national sample of SMM, exclusively focused on BSMM [14], Despite its encouraging findings, the study underscores the need for broader data applicable to the wider SMM population. Finally, most studies that have assessed willingness to utilize HIV prevention services in pharmacies, particularly PrEP, lack theoretical frameworks. The use of theoretical frameworks in this field is critical, as it provides a systematic lens through which to analyze the complex interplay of individual, social, and structural factors affecting willingness to engage with healthcare services, informing targeted interventions to optimize PrEP utilization among SMM [15, 16].To address these gaps, this paper aims to examine willingness to obtain PrEP screening in a pharmacy and its associated correlates among a diverse, national sample of SMM in the US.

Methods

Analytical framework

The analysis presented is based on Andersen’s Behavioral Model of Health Service Utilization (hereafter referred to as Andersen’s behavioral model) [17] to provide a comprehensive understanding of factors influencing willingness to screen for PrEP in a pharmacy among SMM. This model considers the impact of distinct structural and social determinants of the utilization of healthcare services. According to this model, three key domains play a crucial role in shaping an individual’s access to and use of health services: predisposing factors, enabling factors, and need factors. Predisposing factors encompass pre-existing sociodemographic characteristics, such as age and race, independent of health behavior. Enabling factors address logistical aspects of obtaining care and may signal social-structural disadvantage, including disparities in health insurance, educational attainment, income levels, and stigma. Finally, need factors encompass an individual’s perceived risks and assessed needs for medical care.

Numerous reviews of existing literature consistently affirm that Andersen’s behavioral model provides a valuable approach to assessing the social and structural factors influencing healthcare utilization [18, 19]. Consequently, it serves as a strategic analytical framework to identify potential intervention targets to enhance accessibility to and utilization of PrEP-related services in pharmacies.

Data source

Data were obtained from the 2020 American Men’s Internet Survey (AMIS). AMIS is a cross-sectional online behavioral health survey of SMM in the US that has been conducted annually since 2013. The survey collects data on sociodemographic characteristics, sexual behavior, health-related behaviors, and HIV prevention services. The 2020 cycle was conducted from August 2020 to January 2021. Briefly, individuals were recruited through convenience sampling from various websites through banner advertisements and social networking and geospatial networking applications. Additional detail about AMIS are available elsewhere [20].

Study participants

Men were eligible for the AMIS if they reported (1)  ≥ 15 years of age, (2) male sex at birth, (3) cis-gender identity, (4) residing in the US, (5) ever having sex with a man OR a gay/bisexual identity (for those 15–17 years old), and (6) ability to complete the survey in English. Participants were included in the current analysis if they completed the full survey, had oral or anal sex with a man in the past 12 months, and reported being HIV-negative or had an unknown status. Participants who reported being HIV-positive were excluded from this analysis, as PrEP eligibility requires a person to be HIV-negative. Additionally, participants who had taken PrEP in the past 12 months at the time of the survey were not asked about their willingness to obtain PrEP screening in pharmacies, as a function of the skip pattern in the survey [20]. We also excluded participants who had missing data related to their willingness to screen for PrEP in a pharmacy setting (i.e., the outcome variable; n = 273).

Measures

Guided by AHUM domains, we used the following variables to assess willingness to obtain pharmacy-based HIV prevention services among a sample of US SMM.

  • Dependent Variable: To assess willingness to be screened for PrEP in a pharmacy, men were provided with a brief description of what screening for PrEP entailed:

    Screening for PrEP includes answering questions about your sexual behaviors and being tested for HIV and sexually transmitted infections.

    They were subsequently asked, “Would you be willing to be screened for PrEP in a private area in a pharmacy?” and were provided the options: Yes, No, I prefer not to answer, and Don’t Know. The latter two options were excluded from this analysis (n = 1019).

  • Predisposing Factors: Age was treated as a continuous variable in years in descriptive and bivariate analyses. To enhance the interpretation of our findings, age was scaled to five-year increments in multivariable analysis [21]. Race was categorized into four groups: non-Hispanic Black, non-Hispanic White, Hispanic, and Other/Multiple races.

  • Enabling Factors: Employment status was assessed using three categories: Employed, Unemployed, and Retired. Annual household income was categorized into four groups including $0 to 19,999, $20,000 to $39,000, $40,000 to $74,999, and $75,000 or more. Education was defined as the highest level of education completed and categorized as less than (<) a high school (HS) diploma, HS diploma, some college, and college degree or more. Health insurance was assessed as a binary yes/no variable. Lastly, we included a series of questions with binary (yes/no) responses related to health insurance, PrEP awareness, willingness to use PrEP, SMM healthcare stigma (defined as ever feeling afraid of accessing health care services due to someone finding out they have sex with men), and PrEP pharmacy comfort (defined as comfort with speaking to pharmacy staff about PrEP).

  • Need Factors: Need factors were those associated with increased HIV risk and PrEP uptake, particularly among SMM. Participants were asked about the number of male sexual partners they had in the past 12 months (categorized as ‘1’ or ‘2 or more’; no participants reported 0 sexual partners). This item was included as previous studies have found an association between multiple sexual partners and HIV risk [22]. Additionally, participants were asked if they have had condomless anal sex in the past 12 months with another man (yes/no); had any type of sex with a woman in the past 12 months (yes/no); had any STI test in the past 12 months (yes/no); ever been tested for HIV (yes/no); had an HIV test in the past 12 months (yes/no); and if they were worried about becoming infected with HIV (yes/no). Lastly, we categorized participants by their HIV-negative status: HIV negative and never tested/unknown/indeterminate.

Analysis plan

Sample characteristics were described with medians and interquartile ranges (IQRs) for continuous variables and frequencies for categorical variables. Wilcoxon rank tests were performed to examine differences in median age among those who reported willingness to obtain PrEP in pharmacies versus not. Chi-square and Fisher’s exact (when sample sizes were < 5) tests were performed to explore differences by the included AHUM measures for the main outcome. Bivariate analyses were conducted to explore differences in willingness to be screened for PrEP in pharmacies by the three AHUM domains.

In accordance with AHUM, we also estimated a series of three multivariable models. First, all predisposing variables were included in a model. Second, predisposing and enabling factors were modeled together. Finally, predisposing, enabling, and needs based factors were modeled simultaneously. The use of a hierarchical analytic approach was based on multi-level theory, and to assess the incremental contribution of each variable block group on participants’ willingness to screen for PrEP in pharmacies.[23] To increase parsimony, variables that were not significant in bivariate analyses were removed from multivariable models. We estimated correlates of willingness to use pharmacy-based HIV prevention services using a modified stepwise Poisson regression method suited for common binary outcomes with robust variance estimates [24]. A 95% confidence interval (CI95%) was calculated for each prevalence ratio (PR). Analyses were conducted using SAS version 9.4 (Cary, NC).

Results

Our sample included a total of 10,814 SMM who were not taking PrEP at the time of the survey and responded on their willingness to obtain HIV prevention services in pharmacies. The median age was 26 years, and most men were White (61%) and Hispanic (20%). A large proportion of participants were employed (71%) and college-educated (42%), with household incomes <$75,000/year (63%). Eighty-nine percent of participants reported that they had health insurance. Most participants had heard of PrEP (79%), were willing to use PrEP (56%), and felt comfortable speaking with pharmacy staff about getting PrEP (75%). Overall, risk behaviors were high. In the past 12 months, most participants (70%) had two or more male sexual partners and 68% had condomless anal sex. Most (76%) reported that they were willing to screen for PrEP in a pharmacy.

In bivariate analyses, younger participants were significantly more willing to be screened for PrEP in pharmacies compared to older participants (P < .0001) (Table 1). Among racial and ethnic groups, Hispanic participants (80%) and participants of Other/Multiple races (79%) were significantly more willing to be screened for PrEP in a pharmacy setting compared to Black (75%) and White (75%) participants (P < .0001). Household income was inversely associated with willingness to be screened for PrEP in a pharmacy setting (P < .0001). Similarly, participants with less than a college education were more willing to be screened for PrEP in a pharmacy compared to those with a college degree (P < .0001). Seventy-six percent of participants who had health insurance were willing to screen for PrEP in a pharmacy compared 84% who did not have health insurance. Individuals who reported being afraid of accessing healthcare services because someone may discover that they have sex with men (80%) were significantly more willing to screen for PrEP in pharmacies compared to those who were not fearful (76%) (P < .0001). Participants who reported being worried about becoming infected with HIV (87%) were more willing to screen for PrEP in a pharmacy setting compared to those who were not worried (70%) (P < .0001).

Table 1 Sample Characteristics and Bivariate Associations with Willingness to Screen for PrEP in Pharmacies among SMM in the U.S. (n = 10,816)
Full size table

In adjusted analyses, younger participants were slightly less willing to be screened for PrEP in a pharmacy than older participants (PR = 0.99; CI95%=0.98, 0.99) (Table 2). The race/ethnicity association noted above did not persist after accounting for age. Compared to employed individuals, individuals who reported being retired were less willing to be screened for PrEP in pharmacies (PR = 0.89; CI95%=0.81, 0.98). Participants who had a general willingness to use PrEP, compared to those who were not, were more willing to screen for PrEP in a pharmacy (PR = 1.52; CI 95% = 1.45–1.59). Individuals who reported feeling comfortable speaking with pharmacy staff about PrEP were almost three times as likely to be willing to screen for PrEP in a pharmacy compared to those who did not feel comfortable (PR = 2.71; CI95%=2.47, 2.98). Reported worry around becoming infected with HIV was also associated with willingness to obtain PrEP screening in pharmacies (PR = 1.04; CI95%=1.02, 1.06). Importantly, we observed no differences among those who were willing to be screened for PrEP in pharmacies according to race and ethnicity, education level, household income, nor insurance status.

Table 2 Stepwise Poisson Regression Examining Factors Associated with Willingness to Screen for PrEP in Pharmacies Among SMM in the U.S. (n = 10,816)
Full size table

Discussion

Guided by Andersen’s behavioral model, this study explored factors associated with willingness to obtain PrEP screenings in pharmacies among a diverse, national sample of SMM in the US. Although there is a general increase in PrEP willingness among MSM [25], our data suggests variations in willingness to obtain PrEP services in pharmacies based on need, enabling, and predisposing factors. Our findings reveal that a substantial proportion of SMM (76%) expressed willingness to undergo PrEP screening in a pharmacy setting. Our study also shows that being of younger age was associated with less willingness to screen for PrEP in a pharmacy setting. Among enabling factors, those who had a general willingness to use PrEP and felt comfortable discussing PrEP with pharmacy staff were more willing to screen for PrEP in pharmacies. Participants who were reported being retired were less willing to screen for PrEP in a pharmacy compared to those who were employed. Finally, being worried about potentially acquiring HIV was the only need factor linked to willingness to screen for PrEP in a pharmacy-based setting.

Notably, we observed no significant differences in willingness to obtain pharmacy-based HIV prevention services based on race/ethnicity, educational level, annual household income, nor insurance status. This finding is promising as it suggests that pharmacies may serve as an accessible and equitable option for individuals, including those most structurally disadvantaged and at-risk for HIV acquisition. Previous studies have highlighted racial inequities in PrEP uptake, often attributed to various barriers faced by minoritized populations, including structural inequities and intersectional stigma and discrimination [26,27,28]. However, contrary to existing research on the relationship between stigma and healthcare utilization among SMM, our findings reveal that stigma may not fully impact willingness to use screen for PrEP in pharmacy settings among a diverse group of SMM. In the context of this study, this might be due to a higher need for HIV prevention services. Similarly, the substantial willingness observed across demographic groups in our study signals a potential avenue for addressing these inequities through innovative service delivery models like pharmacy-based PrEP screening.

Our study highlights the pivotal role of pharmacists and pharmacy staff in facilitating discussions about PrEP and promoting its uptake among SMM. Comfort with speaking to pharmacy staff about PrEP emerged as a significant predictor of willingness to undergo pharmacy-based HIV prevention services. Indeed, in a previous study, Lutz et al. report that approximately 94% of participants felt comfortable discussing PrEP with a pharmacist prior to starting the medication [29]. This underscores the importance of pharmacist training and ensuring patient privacy to foster a supportive environment for discussing sensitive topics related to HIV prevention. Additionally, addressing social stigma and discrimination remains a critical piece in enhancing HIV prevention efforts, particularly among populations like BSMM. Pharmacies, perceived as less stigmatizing and more convenient settings than traditional clinics, [12, 29, 30, 31, 32] hold significant promise in mitigating the impact of stigma on HIV prevention access and uptake.

In this study, we employed Andersen's Behavioral Model of Health Service Utilization as a comprehensive framework for understanding the factors influencing willingness to obtain HIV prevention services in pharmacies among SMM. This model allowed us to consider the impact of various predisposing, enabling, and need factors on individuals' access to and use of pharmacy-based PrEP screening.

Previous intervention studies have demonstrated the feasibility of implementing HIV testing and PrEP access in pharmacies, effectively reaching populations with increased needs [10, 33]. For instance, one study found that pharmacy-based point-of-care HIV testing, including pretest counseling, test processing, and posttest counseling, was feasible within a 30-minute period in 21 pharmacies across both rural and urban areas in the U.S. [34]. Another study, addressed the stigma usually associated with HIV and HIV testing by utilizing a comprehensive health screening approach, which improved HIV testing uptake among individuals at increased risk in disadvantaged neighborhoods [35]. This intervention found that individuals that participants who received HIV testing, holistic chronic disease screening, and a healthy lifestyle video—aimed at normalizing all screenings and destigmatizing HIV—were more likely to undergo HIV testing in a pharmacy compared to those who only received HIV testing services [35]. Regarding PrEP screenings specifically, Sawkin and Shah’s study trained clinical pharmacists to provide PrEP education and medication management, enabling PrEP providers through a collaborative practice agreement (CPA) [36]. They employed a destigmatizing approach similar to Crawford et al. [35], offering PrEP screening alongside other health condition screenings [36]. Despite growing evidence and advocation for integrating HIV prevention services in pharmacies, very few interventions have specifically focused on enhancing pharmacy-based HIV testing and PrEP screening among SMM, particularly racially and SMM living in disadvantaged neighborhoods. This is particularly notable given their demonstrated willingness to utilized such services, as evidenced by this study’s findings and others [12, 14, 32]. HIV prevention services in pharmacies, particularly PrEP screenings, may currently be limited due to restrictions around pharmacists’ ability to initiate PrEP for clients without a CPA with a partnering PrEP-prescribing physician [37]. Efforts to address these limitations and barriers are critically needed.

Building upon the findings of this study, future studies may focus on integrating and testing culturally appropriate strategies within pharmacy-based settings to assess if willingness to undergo PrEP screening translates into true uptake and sustained engagement with preventive care. Moreover, further research is needed to explore the mechanisms by which stigma, including intersectional stigma and discrimination, influences HIV risk and PrEP utilization among SMM, particularly BSMM, in pharmacy settings. To advance PrEP equity, further investigation is warranted to comprehensively understand and address the underlying reasons behind certain men's willingness and unwillingness to access such services. By addressing these challenges and leveraging the potential of pharmacies as accessible and inclusive platforms for HIV prevention, we can make advancements towards the goal of reducing HIV disparities and ending the epidemic.

Limitations

Several limitations should be considered in the interpretation of our findings. First, AMIS relies on a convenience sample of internet-using SMM, which may introduce selection bias. Caution should be exercised when generalizing these results to the broader population of SMM in the US. Notably, Notably, while a significant portion of our sample consisted of non-Hispanic white men, which does not fully represent the diversity within the SMM community. Second, the data collection period during the Fall of 2020 coincided with the COVID-10 pandemic, which may have influenced men’s perceptions of healthcare and their access to it, including through pharmacies. The evolving landscape of healthcare delivery during this time may have affected participants’ willingness to engage with pharmacy-based HIV prevention services. Third, the categorization of race/ethnicity data, particularly to the grouping of individuals under ‘Other/Multiple Races’, limits the ability to address specific prevention needs of communities disproportionately affected by HIV. For instance, the CDC reports a notable increase (24%) in HIV diagnoses among American Indian/Alaska Native individuals between 2015 and 2019 [38]. Future research efforts should prioritize strategic recruitment of racially and ethnically diverse SMM cohorts, enabling a nuanced analysis able to consider unique prevention strategies tailored to different communities. Finally, the cross-sectional design of our study precludes establishing causality or assessing temporality. While our findings indicate willingness among SMM to access pharmacy-based HIV prevention services, longitudinal studies are needed to ascertain whether this willingness translates into true uptake of services such as PrEP over time.

Conclusion

Integrating HIV prevention services within pharmacy-based settings is a promising strategy in the comprehensive initiative to end the HIV epidemic in the US, including inequities experienced by priority populations. The receptivity of a diverse, nationwide sample of SMM to undergo PrEP screening in pharmacies, even in the face of potential sexuality-based stigma, underscore the viability of this approach. Recognizing pharmacies as inherently conducive and accessible environments for such services further strengthens the case for their pivotal role in advancing HIV prevention efforts.

The next crucial step involves the implementation of demonstration studies aimed at assessing the impact of pharmacy-based PrEP delivery models on both the uptake and adherence of PrEP among SMM. These studies will contribute invaluable insights to inform and enhance the effectiveness of future strategies, ultimately bringing us closer to the goal of eradicating HIV.

Availability of data and materials

The datasets used and/or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

References

  1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. HIV PrEP effectiveness. Available from: https://www.cdc.gov/hiv/basics/prep/prep-effectiveness.html.

  2. Huang Ylin, Zhu A, Smith W, Harris DK, Hoover N. HIV preexposure prophylaxis, by race and ethnicity — United States, 2014–2016. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2019;67(41):1147–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Fanfair RN, Mermin JH. Expanding PrEP coverage in the United States to achieve EHE goals. 2024. Available from: https://www.cdc.gov/nchhstp/director-letters/expanding-prep-coverage.html. Cited 2024 Jun 11.

  4. Kanny D, Jeffries WL, Chapin-Bardales J, Denning P, Cha S, Finlayson T, et al. Racial/ethnic disparities in HIV preexposure prophylaxis among men who have sex with men — 23 urban areas, 2017. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2019;68(37):801–6.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Harrington KRV, Chandra C, Alohan DI, Cruz D, Young HN, Siegler AJ, et al. Examination of HIV preexposure prophylaxis need, availability, and potential pharmacy integration in the southeastern US. JAMA Netw Open. 2023;6(7):e2326028.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Siegler AJ, Bratcher A, Weiss KM. Geographic access to preexposure prophylaxis clinics among men who have sex with men in the United States. Am J Public Health. 2019;109(9):1216–23.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Sharpe JD, Sanchez TH, Siegler AJ, Guest JL, Sullivan PS. Association between the geographic accessibility of PrEP and PrEP use among MSM in nonurban areas. J Rural Health. 2022;38(4):948–59.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Storholm ED, Ober AJ, Mizel ML, Matthews L, Sargent M, Todd I, et al. Primary care providers’ knowledge, attitudes and beliefs about HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP): informing network-based interventions. AIDS Educ Prev. 2021;33(4):325–44.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Mayer KH, Agwu A, Malebranche D. Barriers to the wider use of pre-exposure prophylaxis in the United States: a narrative review. Adv Ther. 2020;37(5):1778–811.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Crawford ND, Myers S, Young H, Klepser D, Tung E. The role of pharmacies in the HIV prevention and care continuums: a systematic review. AIDS Behav. 2021;25(6):1819–28.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Rathbun RC, Durham SH, Farmer KC, Zuckerman AD, Badowski ME. Evaluation of human immunodeficiency virus curricular content in schools of pharmacy in the United States. Curr Pharm Teach Learn. 2020;12(8):910–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Crawford ND, Josma D, Morris J, Hopkins R, Young HN. Pharmacy-based pre-exposure prophylaxis support among pharmacists and men who have sex with men. J Am Pharm Associ. 2020;60(4):602–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Crawford ND, Dean T, Rivera AV, Guffey T, Amesty S, Rudolph A, et al. Pharmacy intervention to improve HIV testing uptake using a comprehensive health screening approach. Public Health Repo. 2016;131 Suppl(Suppl 1):139–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Alohan DI, Evans G, Sanchez T, Harrington KRV, Quamina A, Young HN, et al. Examining pharmacies’ ability to increase pre-exposure prophylaxis access for black men who have sex with men in the United States. J Am Pharmacists Association. 2023;63(2):547–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Glanz K, Bishop DB. The role of behavioral science theory in development and implementation of public health interventions. Annu Rev Public Health. 2010;31:399–418.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Noar SM, Zimmerman RS. Health behavior theory and cumulative knowledge regarding health behaviors: are we moving in the right direction? Health Educ Res. 2005;20(3):275–90.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Andersen RM. Revisiting the behavioral model and access to medical care: does it matter? J Health Soc Behav. 1995;36(1):1–10 Published by : American Sociological Association Stable URL : https://www.jstor.org/stable/2137284 Revisiting the Behavioral Model and Access to Medical Care : Does It Matter?*.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Babitsch B, Gohl D, von Lengerke T. Re-revisiting Andersen’s behavioral model of health services use: a systematic review of studies from 1998–2011. Psychosoc Med. 2012;9:Doc11.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Phillips KA, Morrison KR, Andersen R, Aday LA. Understanding the context of healthcare utilization: assessing environmental and provider-related variables in the behavioral model of utilization. Health Serv Res. 1998;33(3 Pt 1):571–96.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Wiatrek S, Zlotorzynska M, Rai R, Sullivan P, Sanchez T. The annual American men’s internet survey of behaviors of men who have sex with men in the United States: key indicators report 2018. JMIR Public Health Surveill. 2021;7(3):e21812–e21812 https://publichealth.jmir.org/2021/3/e21812.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Sperandei S. Understanding logistic regression analysis. Biochem Med (Zagreb). 2014;24(1):12–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Koblin BA, Husnik MJ, Colfax G, Huang Y, Madison M, Mayer K, et al. Risk factors for HIV infection among men who have sex with men. AIDS. 2006;20(5):731–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Wong GY, Mason WM. The hierarchical logistic regression model for multilevel analysis. J Am Stat Assoc. 1985;80(391):513–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Barros AJD, Hirakata VN. Alternatives for logistic regression in cross-sectional studies: an empirical comparison of models that directly estimate the prevalence ratio. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2003;3(1):1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Sullivan PS, Sanchez TH, Zlotorzynska M, Chandler CJ, Sineath R, Kahle E, et al. National trends in HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis awareness, willingness and use among United States men who have sex with men recruited online, 2013 through 2017. J Int AIDS Soc. 2020;23(3): e25461.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Levy ME, Wilton L, Phillips G, Glick SN, Kuo I, Brewer RA, et al. Understanding structural barriers to accessing HIV testing and prevention services among black men who have sex with men (BMSM) in the United States. AIDS Behav. 2014;18(5):972–96.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Babel RA, Wang P, Alessi EJ, Raymond HF, Wei C. Stigma, HIV risk, and access to HIV prevention and treatment services among men who have sex with men (MSM) in the United States: a scoping review. AIDS Behav. 2021;25(11):3574–604.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Quinn K, Bowleg L, Dickson-Gomez J. “The fear of being Black plus the fear of being gay”: the effects of intersectional stigma on PrEP use among young Black gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men. Soc Sci Med. 2019;232:86–93.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Lutz S, Heberling M, Goodlet KJ. Patient perspectives of pharmacists prescribing HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis: a survey of patients receiving antiretroviral therapy. J Am Pharmacists Association. 2021;61(2):e75-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Ryder PT, Meyerson BE, Coy KC, von Hippel CDJ. Pharmacists’ perspectives on HIV testing in community pharmacies. J Am Pharmacists Association. 2013;53(6):595–600.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. McCree DH, Byrd KK, Johnston M, Gaines M, Weidle PJ. Roles for pharmacists in the “ending the HIV epidemic: a plan for America” initiative. Public Health Rep. 2020;135(5):547–54.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Crawford ND, Albarran T, Chamberlain A, Hopkins R, Josma D, Morris J, et al. Willingness to discuss and screen for pre-exposure prophylaxis in pharmacies among men who have sex with men. J Pharm Pract. 2021;34(5):734–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Zhao A, Dangerfield DT, Nunn A, Patel R, Farley JE, Ugoji CC, et al. Pharmacy-based interventions to increase use of HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis in the United States: a scoping review. AIDS Behav. 2022;26(5):1377–92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Weidle PJ, Lecher S, Botts LW, Jones L, Spach DH, Alvarez J, et al. HIV testing in community pharmacies and retail clinics: a model to expand access to screening for HIV infection. J Am Pharmacists Association. 2014;54(5):486–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Crawford ND, Dean T, Rivera AV, Guffey T, Amesty S, Rudolph A, et al. Pharmacy intervention to improve HIV testing uptake using a comprehensive health screening approach. Public Health Rep. 2016;131(Suppl 1):139–46.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Sawkin M, Shah M. Development of a pharmacist-led human immunodeficiency virus pre-exposure prophylaxis clinic at an urban community clinic. J Am Pharm Assoc. 2016;56:e48.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Crawford ND, Lewis CF, Moore R, Pietradoni G, Weidle P. Examining the multilevel barriers to pharmacy-based HIV prevention and treatment services. Sex Transm Dis. 2022;49(11S):S22.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  38. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. HIV surveillance report, 2019, vol. 32. 2021. Available from: http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/library/reports/hiv-surveillance.html.

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors thank the study participants and research staff involved with the American Men's Internet Survey 2020 cycle.

Funding

This work was supported by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (P30AI050409), the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH; R34MH119007), and the National Institute of Drug Abuse (T32 DA050552). ).The results and opinions expressed therein represent those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of NIAID, NIMH, nor NIDA.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Behavioral, Social, and Health Education Sciences, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, United States

    Daniel I. Alohan & Natalie D. Crawford

  2. Department of Social and Behavioral Sciences, School of Public Health, Brown University, Providence, RI, United States

    Gabrielle Evans

  3. Department of Epidemiology, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, United States

    Travis Sanchez & Kristin R.V. Harrington

  4. NAESM, Inc, Atlanta, GA, United States

    Alvan Quamina

  5. Department of Clinical and Administrative Pharmacy, College of Pharmacy, University of Georgia, Athens, GA, United States

    Henry N. Young

  6. Department of Behavioral, Social and Health Education Sciences, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, 1518 Clifton Road, NE, 30322, Atlanta, GA, United States

    Daniel I. Alohan

Authors
  1. Daniel I. Alohan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Gabrielle Evans
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Travis Sanchez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Kristin R.V. Harrington
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Alvan Quamina
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Henry N. Young
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Natalie D. Crawford
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

DA conceptualized the idea of the study, and led the analysis and writing of the manuscript. GE, KH, TS, NC contributed to the concept development, and review and editing of the manuscript. AQ and HY contributed to the review and editing of the manuscript. TS contributed to funding acquisition and data curation. NC provided supervision over the manuscript. All authors have seen and approved the final version of the manuscript for publication.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Daniel I. Alohan.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

All study procedures were approved by the Emory University Institutional Review Board, and each participant provided informed consent before completing the survey.

Consent for publication

Not applicable

Competing interests

The authors have no conflicts of interest to report.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Alohan, D.I., Evans, G., Sanchez, T. et al. Using the andersen healthcare utilization model to assess willingness to screen for prep in pharmacy-based settings among cisgender sexually minoritized men: results from the 2020 american men’s internet survey. BMC Public Health 24, 2349 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-024-19836-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-024-19836-5

Keywords:

BMC Public Health

ISSN: 1471-2458

Contact us