Authors : Danny Mutumba; Dr. Kelvin Chibomba

Volume/Issue : Volume 11 - 2026, Issue 1 - January

Google Scholar : https://tinyurl.com/kju2c8bv

Scribd : https://tinyurl.com/5n8nvjdx

DOI : https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/26jan355

Note : A published paper may take 4-5 working days from the publication date to appear in PlumX Metrics, Semantic Scholar, and ResearchGate.

Abstract : This study aimed to assess knowledge and uptake of the Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) intervention among 80 selected individuals in Mumbwa rural district, Central Province, Zambia, with specific objectives to evaluate participants’ awareness and use of PrEP, examine barriers to accessing the intervention, and identify best practices for promoting PrEP within the community. HIV remains a major public health concern in rural areas like Mumbwa, where access to preventive interventions, including PrEP, is limited. Although PrEP has been proven effective in reducing HIV transmission, knowledge and uptake among at-risk individuals remain low, and there is insufficient empirical data on awareness, use, and barriers in this context, which hinders effective public health planning and the design of targeted interventions, potentially perpetuating high HIV infection rates and undermining national HIV prevention strategies with adverse health, social, and economic consequences for rural communities. The study employed a descriptive research design with a mixed-methods approach, selecting 80 participants including current PrEP users, non-users, community members, and health workers through simple random and purposive sampling to ensure diverse representation. Quantitative data were collected through structured questionnaires and analyzed using Stata and Excel with descriptive and inferential statistics, while qualitative data were gathered through semi-structured interviews and focus group discussions, transcribed, coded in NVivo, and analyzed thematically. Triangulation across methods, data sources, theory, and investigators enhanced validity and reliability, and ethical approval was obtained with informed consent, confidentiality, anonymity, and voluntary participation strictly observed. The findings revealed that 70 percent of participants reported taking PrEP, while 30 percent had not, indicating relatively high uptake compared to similar rural contexts, although actual use (mean = 0.70, SD = 0.46) was significantly lower than exposure (mean = 2.85, SD = 0.98), highlighting a gap between awareness and uptake. Education was a key determinant of adoption, with higher-educated individuals more likely to take PrEP and those with lower education holding misconceptions. Barriers included distance to health facilities, stigma, and provider attitudes, while strong community support positively influenced awareness and engagement. Best practices for promoting PrEP included peer education (30%), community outreach (28%), mobile clinics (22%), and counseling (22%), with community support being the strongest predictor of participation. Younger participants preferred interactive methods such as peer discussions and community dramas, whereas older participants favored advisory sessions. Recommendations were therefore to strengthen targeted health education, peer-led programs, mobile clinics, and community outreach, particularly in remote areas, while addressing barriers such as stigma, distance, and provider attitudes, and leveraging community support to sustain PrEP uptake.

Keywords : Barriers, Community Support, Knowledge, PrEP, Uptake.

References :

1. Amico, K. R., et al. (2019). Adherence challenges for daily oral PrEP: perspectives from PrEP users and providers. AIDS Patient Care and STDs, 33(9), 371-380.
2. Baeten, J. M., et al. (2015). Use of antiretroviral prophylaxis for HIV prevention in heterosexual men and women. Lancet HIV, 2(11), e467-e477.
3. Baeten, J., et al. (2012). Antiretroviral prophylaxis for HIV prevention in heterosexual men and women. New England Journal of Medicine, 367, 399-410.
4. Bekker, L. G., et al. (2018). Critical perspectives on PrEP as standard prevention in southern Africa. Lancet HIV, 5(5), e247-e252.
5. Chabata, S. M., et al. (2021). Uptake of HIV testing, linkage, and PrEP use among adolescent girls and young women in Zimbabwe. Journal of International AIDS Society.
6. Chanda, M., et al. (2024). Barriers and facilitators to uptake and persistence on PrEP among key populations in Southern Province, Zambia: A thematic analysis. BMC Public Health.
7. Corneli, A., et al. (2016). Facilitators and barriers to PrEP use among US women in the VOICE‐C study. Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes, 72(4), 360-368..
8. Fonner, V. A., et al. (2016). Effectiveness and safety of oral HIV PrEP: a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical trials. AIDS, 30(1), 197-204.
9. Grant, R. M., et al. (2010). Preexposure chemoprophylaxis for HIV prevention in men who have sex with men. New England Journal of Medicine, 363, 2587-2599.
10. Hosek, S. G., et al. (2021). Persistent challenges in PrEP implementation among adolescents and young people. Current Opinion in HIV and AIDS, 16(6), 414-421.
11. Hosek, S., et al. (2017). An HIV Preexposure prophylaxis demonstration project and safety study for young MSM. Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes, 74(1), 21-29.
12. Johnson, L., & Brown, A. (2020). Overcoming barriers: best practices for PrEP delivery among marginalized populations in sub-Saharan Africa. Global Public Health.
13. Kamanga, G. et al. (2022). Salient beliefs and intention to use pre-exposure prophylaxis among pregnant and breastfeeding women in Zambia: Application of the Theory of Planned Behaviours. PLOS ONE.
14. Kumwimba, M. Y. (2025). Knowledge and acceptability of HIV Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) among adolescents in Lusaka District, Zambia. University of Lusaka.
15. Leteka, L., Mulenga, D., Mukanga, B., Nyirenda, H. T., & Daka, V. (2023). Awareness and Use of Pre-Exposure and Post Exposure Prophylaxes as Occupational Health and Safety Measure for Clinical Students at Copperbelt University Medical School in Zambia. International Journal of Sciences: Basic and Applied Research (IJSBAR).
16. Lucas, B., & Medley, A. (2018). Barriers to uptake of PrEP among women: a systematic review. AIDS Care, 30(7), 810-816.
17. Makenzih, B. M., Mkumba, G., Lubeya, K. M., Kaonga, P., & Kazonga, E. (2024). Factors Associated with Awareness and Utilization of Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) among Pregnant Women Attending Antenatal Care in Selected Public Hospitals in Lusaka, Zambia. International Research in Medical and Health Sciences, .
18. Mayer, K. H., et al. (2020). Use of oral pre-exposure prophylaxis among adolescents: what we know, what we need to know. Journal of the International AIDS Society, 23(S3), e25667.
19. McCormack, S., et al. (2016). Preexposure prophylaxis to prevent the acquisition of HIV-1 infection (PROUD): effectiveness results from the pilot phase of a pragmatic open-label randomised trial. The Lancet, 387, 53-60.
20. Mukupa, F., et al. (2024). Awareness and willingness to use pre‐exposure prophylaxis among the University of Zambia students: A cross-sectional study. Health Science Reports.
21. Ndhlovu, C., & Others. (2024). Creating allies: Qualitative exploration of young women’s preferences for PrEP methods and parents’ role in PrEP uptake and user support in urban and rural Zambia. BMC Women’s Health, 24, Article 71.
22. Scott, H., et al. (2021). The impact of stigma and misinformation on PrEP uptake: evidence from South Africa. AIDS & Behavior.
23. Sikazwe, I., et al. (2024). Programme science in action: lessons from an