Our objectives were to evaluate tolerance and compliance of post-exposure triple therapy in health-care workers (HCWs) by retrospective observational study. Structured telephone interview of HCWs identified through data from antiretroviral prescribing centres. Twenty HCWs who received triple prophylaxis were identified over one year. Sixteen agreed to participate in the study. All but one source patient had documented HIV infection. Half HCWs were not aware of post-exposure therapy. Most HCWs received a zidovudine, lamivudine and indinavir combination. All completed at least 4 weeks of therapy. Only 50% received their first dosage less than 4 h after exposure. Nearly all experienced adverse events, mostly digestive (nausea and abdominal pain n=15) or psychological (anxiety and depression n=15), none resulting in therapy discontinuation. Most events occurred 2 to 7 days after therapy initiation. Most modified their sexual life with abstinence or condom use. Compliance was excellent. Half HCWs did not miss any tablet, 4 forgot one dosing a month and 4 one dosing a week. Follow up is over 6 months in all but one HCW. No HIV seroconversion has been observed to date. In France, post-exposure triple antiretroviral therapy is widely available 24 h a day in every emergency room but further training and development of HCWs is needed to decrease consulting time and increase referral to specialized physicians. Notable moderate adverse events, both physical and psychological are noted, however, compliance is excellent.

BackgroundRecent studies analysing the trends in antipsychotic (AP) prescriptions for children and adolescents have raised concerns regarding the influence of socioeconomic status. Previous findings have also shown variable prescription rates for first-generation (FG) and second-generation (SG) APs.MethodOur objectives were to assess the proportion of patients from low-income families receiving APs and the most commonly prescribed APs in France. We conducted a descriptive analysis of AP drugs dispensed during a 1-year period (July 1, 2013–June 30, 2014) in a northwestern region of France with 941,857 subjects less than 18 years old. All data were extracted from an exhaustive, individual and anonymous social security database. We obtained each subject’s socioeconomic status (by identifying their affiliation with a specific social security program) and also collected sociodemographic data, drug type, prescribing and dispensing dates and amount, and prescriber type (e.g., hospital physician, general practitioner, psychiatrist, paediatrician).ResultsThere were two main novel findings. First, we found that the proportion of patients with AP prescriptions was nearly ten times higher in low-income families than in the general population: 35.9% of CMU-C patients compared to 3.7% in all of Pays de la Loire (X 2 = 7875.1, p < 0.001). Additionally, we found a higher rate of FGAP than SGAP prescriptions (65% vs. 57%).ConclusionsOur study suggests two types of AP misuse that could provide interesting targets for public healthcare interventions.First, our results strongly suggest an over-representation of patients from low-income families. Low-income families primarily resided in areas with low physician density and appeared to receive drugs to treat their conditions more frequently than other individuals. This increased prescription rate is a public health issue, potentially requiring political action. Second, the use of FGAPs did not adhere to the latest recommendations for drug use in this population, and this discrepancy should be addressed with informational campaigns targeted to medical practitioners.