One Swiss study demonstrated a reduction in the number

of NPEP prescriptions after the introduction of active source tracing. In 146 exposures, 76 involved a source whose HIV serostatus was unknown. Of these, NPEP was either avoided, or commenced and later ceased, in 31 patients (40.8%) when the source was contacted and tested negative for HIV [5]. A recently published study in a larger Swiss cohort produced similar findings. Over a 10-year period there MG-132 were 910 requests for NPEP and the HIV status of the source was unknown in 702 cases. In 298 (42%) of these cases the source was identified and tested [6]. The VNPEPS promotes source tracing but in practice very few source partners are contacted and tested for HIV. Between August 2005 and March 2008, 877 of 1355 patients presenting for NPEP indicated that their source partner was of unknown HIV status. Of these, only 19 patients (2.2%) stopped NPEP after

their source was found to be HIV Ab negative. In view of the success of the Swiss source-tracing study, the VNPEPS instituted a research study with the objective of increasing the number of source partners who could be contacted and tested. We hypothesized that the availability of rapid HIV testing, plus the option of a mobile testing service, would increase the likelihood of a source partner being contacted and agreeing to an HIV test, and thereby reduce SB203580 unnecessary NPEP prescriptions. Patients presenting to the two busiest NPEP sites [the Melbourne Sexual Health

Centre (MSHC) and The Alfred Hospital Emergency and Trauma Centre (AHE&TC)] who reported a source partner of unknown HIV status were routinely asked if their source could be traced. If the exposed person indicated that their source partner was traceable they were asked to contact them and discuss the possibility of having an HIV test. Ethics committee restrictions required the exposed person to contact the source Rolziracetam directly, or the treating practitioner could contact the source on behalf of the exposed person only at the time of the consultation. Between 1 July and 30 November 2010, 168 eligible patients presented to the MSHC and The AHE&TC. Of these, 116 (69%) reported a source of unknown HIV status and 40 identified that they were able to trace their source. Despite this, no source individual was contacted and the study failed to enrol any participants. There were four patients at the MSHC who did stop NPEP after their source was found to be HIV Ab negative. However, this follow-up was done outside the study. At best, only four of 116 (3.4%; 95% confidence interval 0.9–8.6%) of NPEP prescriptions were avoided. These are very different results from those reported by the Swiss study, which we were attempting to reproduce. Our hypothesis could not be addressed satisfactorily.