Respondents were asked to register with a clinic name, city, and

Respondents were asked to register with a clinic name, city, and country. If more than one survey was completed for a clinic, one completed survey was randomly selected from each clinic. If two surveys were started by respondents HCS assay from the same clinic, the more complete survey was retained. All identifying information was deleted before the analysis and results were compiled according to the region at the request of participants to ensure anonymity. The region classifications were those used previously for CDC Travelers’ Health

analyses, although some regions were combined if responses were limited. Data were described by using SAS 9.2 (SAS Institute, Cary, NC, USA) and ArcGIS (ESRI, Redlands, CA, USA). Approximately 5,314 surveys were distributed (Figure 1), but many surveys went to organization members who were not eligible for participation because they did not provide direct PEP patient care. This overdistribution was unavoidable because of inability of some participating organizations to distinguish their member’s profession, current position, geographic location, or clinic services in e-mail listserv rosters. Therefore, the number of targeted individual e-mails was not known, and the survey distribution and subsequent response this website were understood to represent a

convenience sample. Although 341 persons started the survey, 41 surveys were excluded because of multiple responses per clinic (n = 36) or because no questions were answered (n = 5) (Figure 1). Further, only surveys from respondents indicating that they provided direct

PEP patient care were included (n = 190; Figure 2). The largest number of responses came from North America (38%), Western Europe (19%), Australia and South and West Pacific Islands Tenoxicam (11%), East and Southeast Asia (8%), and Southern Africa (6%). Few respondents participated from clinics in West, Central, and East Africa, and Mexico, Central America, and the Caribbean regions, and none from clinics in the Indian Ocean Islands and Temperate South America. Respondents reported that, in 2010, their clinics evaluated a median of 3,000 patients (range 12–90,000) for any inquiry or illness. Four clinics reported seeing over 50,000 patients a year: one each in Australia and South and West Pacific Islands (n = 90,000), Southern Africa (n = 84,000), North America (n = 72,000), and East and Southeast Asia (n = 54,000). Overall, a median of four patients per clinic (0–30,000) were administered PEP. Regions reporting the highest median number of patients that were administered PEP were South Asia (9 clinics, median = 400); West, Central, and East Africa (4 clinics, median = 15); and Southern Africa (11 clinics, median = 12).

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>