{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.032467532467532464, 'fraction_numerical': 0.018037518037518036, 'mean_word_length': 4.927350427350428, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 1, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
COMPARATIVE EFFICIENCY OF APPLICATION OF DIFFERENT THERAPEUTIC SCHEMES FOR POST-CONTACT PREVENTION OF HIV INFECTION IN HEALTH PROVIDERS.

AIM
Comparative assessment of the efficiency of application of different therapeutic schemes for post-contact prevention (PCP) of HIV infection in health providers.


METHODS
Medical personnel that had professional contacts with HIV-infected patients (n=44) were given medications for PCP. 19 of them (group 1) used phosphazide, 25 (group 2) combivir (lamivudine + zidovudine) in combination with kaletra for 4 weeks after the contact. Phosphazide (AZT Farma K.B., Russia) was used at a dose of 0.4 g twice daily, other medications in standard doses. The results were evaluated 4 weeks, 3, 6, and 12 months after PCP from the safety of the treatment and the absence of professional HIV infection.


RESULTS
The medical personnel showed no signs of HIV infection throughout the entire period of observation. The safety of therapy was confirmed by the absence of myelohepatotoxic effect of the preparations. Combivir therapy caused a 1.8-fold rise in AST activity of within 4 weeks after onset of PCP (p<0,05). Phosphazide produced no such effect.


CONCLUSION
The above results indicate that both schemes ofantiretroviral activity are 100% efficient as PCP of HIV infection, but phosphazide has an advantage of higher safety and better tolerability.