Description:
<jats:sec>
<jats:title>Background:</jats:title>
<jats:p>Pre-exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) is an important option for HIV prevention, but the approach has reached a limited number of people at risk of HIV infection.</jats:p>
</jats:sec>
<jats:sec>
<jats:title>Methods:</jats:title>
<jats:p>A mixed-methods concurrent triangulation design was used to investigate unobserved subgroups of staff who provide community-based, publicly funded HIV testing in Florida (USA). PrEP implementation groups, or classes, were determined using latent class analysis. Generalized linear mixed models were used to estimate PrEP implementation as a function of staff characteristics. In-depth interviews based on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research were analyzed thematically.</jats:p>
</jats:sec>
<jats:sec>
<jats:title>Results:</jats:title>
<jats:p>Based on fit statistics and theoretical relevance, a 3-class latent class analysis was selected. Class 1 (“Universal”) staff were highly likely to talk about PrEP with their clients, regardless of client eligibility. Class 2 (“Eligibility dependent”) staff were most likely to discuss PrEP if they believed their client was eligible. Class 3 (“Limited”) staff sometimes spoke to clients about PrEP, but not systematically. In multivariate analyses, only race and sexual orientation remained significant predictors of the PrEP implementation group. Staff who identified as a racial or sexual minority were less likely to be in the Limited group than their heterosexual or white counterparts. Age, gender, ever having taken PrEP, and HIV status did not impact the odds of being in a specific PrEP implementation group.</jats:p>
</jats:sec>
<jats:sec>
<jats:title>Conclusions:</jats:title>
<jats:p>A subset of HIV testing staff differentially discuss PrEP based on perceived client eligibility; others inconsistently talk to clients about PrEP. Targeted training based on PrEP implementation groups may be beneficial.</jats:p>
</jats:sec>