Informed, but uncertain: managing transmission risk and isolation in the 2022 mpox outbreak among gay and bisexual men in Australia.

In 2022, a global outbreak of mpox (formerly 'monkeypox') emerged in non-endemic countries, including Australia, predominantly affecting gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men. Public health advice on transmission and isolation emerged rapidly from different sources, sometimes conflicting and producing uncertainty. Using the concept of 'counterpublic health', which acknowledges the incorporation of official science and experiences of affected communities into embodied practice, this paper investigates how people affected by mpox in Australia managed risk of transmission and navigated self-isolation. In-depth interviews were conducted with 16 people: 13 people diagnosed with mpox and three close contacts. All participants were cisgender gay and bisexual men living in Australia. Participants thought critically about public health advice, often finding it restrictive and unresponsive to the needs of people with mpox. Participants' decisions about reducing mpox risk and isolating often drew on experiences with other infections (i.e. HIV; COVID-19) and were made collaboratively with the people closest to them (e.g. partners, friends, family) to sustain relationships. Future public health responses to infectious disease outbreaks would benefit from identifying more opportunities to formalise and embed mechanisms to obtain feedback from affected communities so as to inform responses.

Mpox Illness Narratives: Stigmatising Care and Recovery During and After an Emergency Outbreak.

In May 2022, a global outbreak of mpox (formerly monkeypox virus) affected thousands of mainly gay and bisexual men. Mpox is usually a time-limited illness that can involve fever, pain, and skin lesions, but may require hospitalisation. There is scant research into the firsthand experiences of people affected by mpox, including experiences of symptoms, healthcare, and recovery. This study considers the different illness narratives of people who experienced mpox in Australia in 2022. In-depth interviews and 6-month follow-up interviews were conducted with 16 people, including 13 people diagnosed with mpox and three close contacts. All participants were cisgender gay or bisexual men living in Australia. Participants' accounts described minor to severe periods of sickness, negative and stigmatising experiences engaging with healthcare, and some participants experienced long-term effects on their sexual well-being and complications from mpox. The emergency outbreak context meant that mpox was highly distressing, making it difficult to manage and producing varying forms of disruption to everyday life. Mpox was narrated as disruptive in different ways: as a minor interruption to holiday plans, a prolonged period of poor health, or a biographically disruptive event prompting a re-evaluation of sexual values and health. This analysis demonstrates that an unfamiliar emergent disease outbreak related to sexual practices and sociality can reconfigure personal life and sexual well-being, suggesting a need to focus on providing quality patient care in outbreaks of mpox and other infectious diseases.

Public understanding and awareness of and response to monkeypox virus outbreak: A cross-sectional survey of the most affected communities in the United Kingdom during the 2022 public health emergency.

OBJECTIVES: Our objective was to examine the public response to public health and media messaging during the human monkeypox virus (MPXV) outbreak in the UK, focusing on at-risk communities. METHODS: A co-produced, cross-sectional survey was administered in June and July 2022 using community social media channels and the Grindr dating app. Basic descriptive statistics, logistic regression, and odds ratio p values are presented. RESULTS: Of 1932 survey respondents, 1750 identified as men, 88 as women, and 64 as gender non-conforming. Sexual identity was described as gay/lesbian/queer (80%), bisexual (12%), heterosexual (4%), and pansexual (2%); 39% were aged <40 years; 71% self-identified as White, 3% as Black, 8% as Asian, 2%as LatinX, and 11% as 'Mixed or Other' heritage groups. In total, 85% were employed and 79% had completed higher education. A total of 7% of respondents identified themselves as living with HIV. Overall, 34% reported limited understanding of public health information, 52% considered themselves at risk, 61% agreed that people with MPXV should isolate for 21 days, 49% reported they would first attend a sexual health clinic if symptomatic, 86% reported they would accept a vaccine, and 59% believed that MPXV originated from animals. The most trusted sources of information were healthcare professionals (37%), official health agencies (29%), and mainstream media (12%). CONCLUSIONS: Vaccine acceptability was very high, yet the understanding and acceptance of public health information varied. Social determinants of health inequalities already shaping the UK landscape risk were compounded in this new emergency. Engagement with structurally disadvantaged members of affected communities and better dissemination of public health messaging by trusted healthcare professionals are essential for the public health response.

TRIPLE C reporting principles for case study evaluations of the role of context in complex interventions.

BACKGROUND: Guidance and reporting principles such as CONSORT (for randomised trials) and PRISMA (for systematic reviews) have greatly improved the reporting, discoverability, transparency and consistency of published research. We sought to develop similar guidance for case study evaluations undertaken to explore the influence of context on the processes and outcomes of complex interventions. METHODS: A range of experts were recruited to an online Delphi panel, sampling for maximum diversity in disciplines (e.g. public health, health services research, organisational studies), settings (e.g. country), and sectors (e.g. academic, policy, third sector). To inform panel deliberations, we prepared background materials based on: [a] a systematic meta-narrative review of empirical and methodological literatures on case study, context and complex interventions; [b] the collective experience of a network of health systems and public health researchers; and [c] the established RAMESES II standards (which cover one kind of case study). We developed a list of topics and issues based on these sources and encouraged panel members to provide free text comments. Their feedback informed development of a set of items in the form of questions for potential inclusion in the reporting principles. We circulated these by email, asking panel members to rank each potential item twice (for relevance and validity) on a 7-point Likert scale. This sequence was repeated twice. RESULTS: We recruited 51 panel members from 50 organisations across 12 countries, who brought experience of a range of case study research methods and applications. 26 completed all three Delphi rounds, reaching over 80% consensus on 16 items covering title, abstract, definitions of terms, philosophical assumptions, research question(s), rationale, how context and complexity relates to the intervention, ethical approval, empirical methods, findings, use of theory, generalisability and transferability, researcher perspective and influence, conclusions and recommendations, and funding and conflicts of interest. CONCLUSION: The 'Triple C' (Case study, Context, Complex interventions) reporting principles recognise that case studies are undertaken in different ways for different purposes and based on different philosophical assumptions. They are designed to be enabling rather than prescriptive, and to make case study evaluation reporting on context and complex health interventions more comprehensive, accessible and useable.

Mobilising context as complex and dynamic in evaluations of complex health interventions.

BACKGROUND: The relationship between healthcare interventions and context is widely conceived as involving complex and dynamic interactions over time. However, evaluations of complex health interventions frequently fail to mobilise such complexity, reporting context and interventions as reified and demarcated categories. This raises questions about practices shaping knowledge about context, with implications for who and what we make visible in our research. Viewed through the lens of case study research, we draw on data collected for the Triple C study (focused on Case study, Context and Complex interventions), to critique these practices, and call for system-wide changes in how notions of context are operationalised in evaluations of complex health interventions. METHODS: The Triple C study was funded by the Medical Research Council to develop case study guidance and reporting principles taking account of context and complexity. As part of this study, a one-day workshop with 58 participants and nine interviews were conducted with those involved in researching, evaluating, publishing, funding and developing policy and practice from case study research. Discussions focused on how to conceptualise and operationalise context within case study evaluations of complex health interventions. Analysis focused on different constructions and connections of context in relation to complex interventions and the wider social forces structuring participant's accounts. RESULTS: We found knowledge-making practices about context shaped by epistemic and political forces, manifesting as: tensions between articulating complexity and clarity of description; ontological (in)coherence between conceptualisations of context and methods used; and reified versions of context being privileged when communicating with funders, journals, policymakers and publics. CONCLUSION: We argue that evaluations of complex health interventions urgently requires wide-scale critical reflection on how context is mobilised - by funders, health services researchers, journal editors and policymakers. Connecting with how scholars approach complexity and context across disciplines provides opportunities for creatively expanding the field in which health evaluations are conducted, enabling a critical standpoint to long-established traditions and opening up possibilities for innovating the design of evaluations of complex health interventions.

Case study research and causal inference.

Case study methodology is widely used in health research, but has had a marginal role in evaluative studies, given it is often assumed that case studies offer little for making causal inferences. We undertook a narrative review of examples of case study research from public health and health services evaluations, with a focus on interventions addressing health inequalities. We identified five types of contribution these case studies made to evidence for causal relationships. These contributions relate to: (1) evidence about system actors' own theories of causality; (2) demonstrative examples of causal relationships; (3) evidence about causal mechanisms; (4) evidence about the conditions under which causal mechanisms operate; and (5) inference about causality in complex systems. Case studies can and do contribute to understanding causal relationships. More transparency in the reporting of case studies would enhance their discoverability, and aid the development of a robust and pluralistic evidence base for public health and health services interventions. To strengthen the contribution that case studies make to that evidence base, researchers could: draw on wider methods from the political and social sciences, in particular on methods for robust analysis; carefully consider what population their case is a case 'of'; and explicate the rationale used for making causal inferences.

Evaluating complex interventions in context: systematic, meta-narrative review of case study approaches.

BACKGROUND: There is a growing need for methods that acknowledge and successfully capture the dynamic interaction between context and implementation of complex interventions. Case study research has the potential to provide such understanding, enabling in-depth investigation of the particularities of phenomena. However, there is limited guidance on how and when to best use different case study research approaches when evaluating complex interventions. This study aimed to review and synthesise the literature on case study research across relevant disciplines, and determine relevance to the study of contextual influences on complex interventions in health systems and public health research. METHODS: Systematic meta-narrative review of the literature comprising (i) a scoping review of seminal texts (n = 60) on case study methodology and on context, complexity and interventions, (ii) detailed review of empirical literature on case study, context and complex interventions (n = 71), and (iii) identifying and reviewing 'hybrid papers' (n = 8) focused on the merits and challenges of case study in the evaluation of complex interventions. RESULTS: We identified four broad (and to some extent overlapping) research traditions, all using case study in a slightly different way and with different goals: 1) developing and testing complex interventions in healthcare; 2) analysing change in organisations; 3) undertaking realist evaluations; 4) studying complex change naturalistically. Each tradition conceptualised context differently-respectively as the backdrop to, or factors impacting on, the intervention; sets of interacting conditions and relationships; circumstances triggering intervention mechanisms; and socially structured practices. Overall, these traditions drew on a small number of case study methodologists and disciplines. Few studies problematised the nature and boundaries of 'the case' and 'context' or considered the implications of such conceptualisations for methods and knowledge production. CONCLUSIONS: Case study research on complex interventions in healthcare draws on a number of different research traditions, each with different epistemological and methodological preferences. The approach used and consequences for knowledge produced often remains implicit. This has implications for how researchers, practitioners and decision makers understand, implement and evaluate complex interventions in different settings. Deeper engagement with case study research as a methodology is strongly recommended.

We Need to Talk About Complexity in Health Research: Findings From a Focused Ethnography.

There is increasing focus on complexity-informed approaches across health disciplines. This attention takes several forms, but commonly involves framing research topics as "complex" to justify use of particular methods (e.g., qualitative). Little emphasis is placed on how divergent and convergent ways of knowing complexity become negotiated within academic communities. Drawing on findings from a focused ethnography of an international workshop, we illustrate how health researchers employ "boundary-ordering devices" to navigate different meanings ascribed to complexity while they attempt to sustain interdisciplinary communication and collaboration. These include (a) surfacing (but not resolving) tensions between philosophical grounding of knowledge claims and need for practical purchase, (b) employing techniques of representation and abstraction, and (c) drawing on the fluid, ongoing accomplishment of complexity for different audiences and purposes. Our findings have implications for progressing complexity-informed health research, particularly with respect to qualitative approaches.

Case study research for better evaluations of complex interventions: rationale and challenges.

BACKGROUND: The need for better methods for evaluation in health research has been widely recognised. The 'complexity turn' has drawn attention to the limitations of relying on causal inference from randomised controlled trials alone for understanding whether, and under which conditions, interventions in complex systems improve health services or the public health, and what mechanisms might link interventions and outcomes. We argue that case study research-currently denigrated as poor evidence-is an under-utilised resource for not only providing evidence about context and transferability, but also for helping strengthen causal inferences when pathways between intervention and effects are likely to be non-linear. MAIN BODY: Case study research, as an overall approach, is based on in-depth explorations of complex phenomena in their natural, or real-life, settings. Empirical case studies typically enable dynamic understanding of complex challenges and provide evidence about causal mechanisms and the necessary and sufficient conditions (contexts) for intervention implementation and effects. This is essential evidence not just for researchers concerned about internal and external validity, but also research users in policy and practice who need to know what the likely effects of complex programmes or interventions will be in their settings. The health sciences have much to learn from scholarship on case study methodology in the social sciences. However, there are multiple challenges in fully exploiting the potential learning from case study research. First are misconceptions that case study research can only provide exploratory or descriptive evidence. Second, there is little consensus about what a case study is, and considerable diversity in how empirical case studies are conducted and reported. Finally, as case study researchers typically (and appropriately) focus on thick description (that captures contextual detail), it can be challenging to identify the key messages related to intervention evaluation from case study reports. CONCLUSION: Whilst the diversity of published case studies in health services and public health research is rich and productive, we recommend further clarity and specific methodological guidance for those reporting case study research for evaluation audiences.

A Failed Method? Reflections on Using Audio Diaries in Uganda With Young People Growing Up With HIV in the BREATHER Trial.

In this article, we present a case study in which we consider our use of the audio diary method with young people (aged 10-24) living with HIV in Uganda in a longitudinal qualitative study conducted in a clinical randomized control trial. Despite initial enthusiasm for the method among participants to capture accounts of participants' experiences outside of the confines of the HIV clinic, the constraints the young people encountered in accessing sufficient privacy to confidently make recordings meant that no one elected to use them again in the study. Despite the insights the use of the method generated, the lack of acceptability led to its relative failure. This demonstrates that despite the call for innovation, there is an unwavering necessity when selecting methods that they align with the needs and preferences of our participants and with an attentive assessment of the local context in which illness narratives are produced.

Where are we now? A multicountry qualitative study to explore access to pre-antiretroviral care services: a precursor to antiretroviral therapy initiation.

OBJECTIVE: To explore barriers and facilitators to accessing postdiagnosis HIV care in five sub-Saharan African countries. METHODS: In-depth interviews were conducted with 77 people living with HIV (PLHIV) in pre-antiretroviral therapy care or not-yet-in care and 46 healthcare workers. Participants were purposely selected from health and demographic surveillance sites in Karonga (Malawi), Manicaland (Zimbabwe), uMkhanyakude (South Africa), Kisesa (Tanzania) and Rakai and Kyamulibwa (Uganda). Thematic content analysis was conducted, guided by the constructs of affordability, availability and acceptability of care.- RESULTS: Affordability: Transport and treatment costs were a barrier to HIV care, although some participants travelled to distant clinics to avoid being seen by people who knew them or for specific services. Broken equipment and drug stock-outs in local clinics could also necessitate travel to other facilities. Availability: Some facilities did not offer full HIV care, or only offered all services intermittently. PLHIV who frequently travelled complained that care was seldom available to them in places they visited. Acceptability: Severe pain or sickness was a key driver for accessing postdiagnosis care, whereas asymptomatic PLHIV often delayed care-seeking. A belief in witchcraft was a deterrent to accessing clinical care following diagnosis. Changing antiretroviral therapy guidelines generated uncertainty among PLHIV about when to start treatment and delayed postdiagnosis care. PLHIV reported that healthcare workers' knowledge, attitudes and behaviours, and their ability to impart health education, also influenced whether they accessed HIV care. CONCLUSION: Despite efforts to decentralise services over the past decade, many barriers to accessing HIV care persist. There is a need to increase sustained access to care for PLHIV not yet on treatment, with initiatives that encompass biomedical aspects of care alongside considerations for individual and collective challenges they faced. A failure to do so may undermine efforts to achieve universal access to antiretroviral therapy.

Using theories of practice to understand HIV-positive persons varied engagement with HIV services: a qualitative study in six Sub-Saharan African countries.

OBJECTIVES: This article considers the potential of 'theories of practice' for studying and understanding varied (dis)engagement with HIV care and treatment services and begins to unpack the assemblage of elements and practices that shape the nature and duration of individuals' interactions with HIV services. METHODS: We obtained data from a multicountry qualitative study that explores the use of HIV care and treatment services, with a focus on examining the social organisation of engagement with care as a practice and as manifested in the lives of people living with HIV in sub-Saharan Africa. The dataset comprised of 356 interviews with participants from six countries. RESULTS: We noted fluctuating interactions with HIV services in all countries. In line with theories of practice, we found that such varied engagement can be explained by (1) the availability, absence and connections between requisite 'materialities' (eg, health infrastructure, medicines), 'competencies' (eg, knowing how to live with HIV) and 'meanings' (eg, trust in HIV services, stigma, normalisation of HIV) and (2) a host of other life practices, such as working or parenting. These dynamics either facilitated or inhibited engagement with HIV services and were intrinsically linked to the discursive, cultural, political and economic fabric of the participating countries. CONCLUSION: Practice theory provides HIV researchers and practitioners with a useful vocabulary and analytical tools to understand and steer people's differentiated HIV service (dis)engagement. Our application of practice theory to engagement in HIV care, as experienced by HIV service users and providers in six sub-Saharan African countries, highlights the need for a practice-based approach in the delivery of differentiated and patient-centred HIV services.

Prevention of sexual transmission of mpox: a systematic review and qualitative evidence synthesis of approaches.

BACKGROUND: The ongoing multi-country mpox outbreak in previously unaffected countries is primarily affecting sexual networks of men who have sex with men. Evidence is needed on the effectiveness of recommended preventive interventions. To inform WHO guidelines, a systematic review and qualitative evidence synthesis were conducted on mpox preventive behavioural interventions to reduce: (i) sexual acquisition; (ii) onward sexual transmission from confirmed/probable cases; and (iii) utility of asymptomatic testing. METHODS: Medline, EMBASE, PubMed, Cochrane and WHO trial databases, grey literature and conferences were searched for English-language primary research published since 1 January 2022. A reviewer team performed screening, data extraction and bias assessment. A qualitative thematic synthesis explored views and experiences of engagement in prevention in individuals at increased risk. RESULTS: There were 16 studies: 1 on contact-tracing, 2 on sexual behaviour, and 13 on asymptomatic testing. Although MPXV was detected in varying proportions of samples (0.17%-6.5%), the testing studies provide insufficient evidence to fully evaluate this strategy. For the qualitative evidence synthesis, four studies evaluated the experiences of most affected communities. Preferences about preventive interventions were shaped by: mpox information; the diversity of sexual practices; accessibility and quality of mpox testing and care; and perceived cost to wellbeing. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence on the effectiveness of interventions to prevent the sexual transmission of mpox remains scarce. Limited qualitative evidence on values and preferences provides insight into factors influencing intervention acceptability. Given global and local inequities in access to vaccines and treatment, further research is needed to establish the effectiveness of additional interventions.

Cross-sectional survey of sexual health professionals' experiences and perceptions of the 2022 mpox outbreak in the UK.

OBJECTIVE: To understand the experiences and perceptions of sexual health professionals responding to the May 2022 mpox outbreak in the UK. DESIGN: Cross-sectional, anonymous, online survey collecting quantitative and qualitative data. Convenience sample recruited via an international network of sexual health and HIV clinicians responding to mpox and promoted through clinical associations and social media. Survey domains included: clinical workload; preparedness, support, and training; safety at work; vaccination; and well-being. Qualitative descriptive analysis of open-text responses was conducted to support interpretation of the quantitative data. PARTICIPANTS: Participants who were employed as sexual health professionals in the UK and had direct clinical experience of mpox were included in the analysis. The survey was completed between 11 August and 31 October 2022 by 139 respondents, the majority of whom were doctors (72.7%), cis-female (70.5%) and White (78.4%). RESULTS: 70.3% reported that they were required to respond to mpox in addition to their existing clinical responsibilities, with 46.8% working longer hours as a result. In the open-text data, respondents highlighted that workload pressures were exacerbated by a lack of additional funding for mpox, pre-existing pressures on sexual health services, and unrealistic expectations around capacity. 67.6% of respondents reported experiencing negative emotional impact due to their mpox work, with stress (59.0%), fatigue (43.2%) and anxiety (36.0%) being the most common symptoms. 35.8% stated that they were less likely to remain in their profession because of their experiences during the mpox outbreak. In the open-text data, these feelings were ascribed to post-COVID exhaustion, understaffing and frustration among some participants at the handling of the mpox response. CONCLUSIONS: These findings indicate that sexual health services require increased funding and resources, along with evidence-based well-being interventions, to support sexual health professionals' outbreak preparedness and recovery.

Barriers and facilitators to HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis for cisgender and transgender women in the UK.

Uptake of oral HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) among cisgender and transgender women in the UK has been low. In this Review, we explore the barriers and facilitators to PrEP access for these groups, with a focus on health equity. We included 20 studies, including seven abstracts presented at conferences. The study samples were disparate, with minimal overlap between papers. We identified barriers at the individual, interpersonal, and structural levels, including poor awareness and acceptability; stigma, race, and ethnicity; restricted access to PrEP; and exclusion from clinical trials. We found hidden subpopulations of women who could potentially benefit from PrEP, of whom little is known about their PrEP knowledge, preferences, and access due to a lack of UK research. These subpopulations include non-Black African women, transgender women, sex workers, migrant women, women experiencing intimate partner violence, incarcerated women, and women who inject drugs. We highlight opportunities to address these obstacles. Research on the use of PrEP by women in the UK is scarce, and existing research has poor granularity. Without a better understanding of the needs and preferences of the full spectrum of women who could benefit from PrEP, the UK will not reach zero transmissions by 2030.

Gender and ethnicity intersect to reduce participation at a large European hybrid HIV conference.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate how gender and ethnicity of panel members intersect to effect audience participation at a large European hybrid conference. DESIGN: An observational cross-sectional study design was used to collect data at the conference and descriptive survey was used to collect data retrospectively from the participants. SETTING: European AIDS Clinical Society 18th Conference; a 3223-delegate, hybrid conference held online and in London over 4 days in October 2021. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We observed the number and type of questions asked at 12 of 69 sessions and described characteristics of the panel composition by ethnicity, gender and seniority. A postconference survey of conference attendees collated demographic information, number of questions asked during the conference and the reasons for not asking questions. RESULTS: Men asked the most questions and were more likely to ask multiple questions in the observed sessions (61.5%). People from white ethnic groups asked >95% of the questions in the observed sessions. The fewest questions were asked in the sessions with the least diverse panels in terms of both ethnicity and gender. Barriers to asking questions differed between genders and ethnicities. CONCLUSIONS: Our study aims to provide evidence to help conference organisers improve leadership, equality, diversity and inclusion in the professional medical conference setting. This will support equitable dissemination of knowledge and improve education and engagement of delegates. To our knowledge, this is the first study describing conference participation by both ethnicity and gender in panellists and delegates within a hybrid conference setting.

Study protocol: the ILANA study - exploring optimal implementation strategies for long-acting antiretroviral therapy to ensure equity in clinical care and policy for women, racially minoritised people and older people living with HIV in the UK - a qualitative multiphase longitudinal study design.

INTRODUCTION: Cabotegravir and rilpivirine (CAB+RPV long-acting (LA)) is recommended as a treatment for HIV-1 allowing people living with HIV to receive 2 monthly injectable treatment, rather than daily pills. Providing injectable therapy in a system designed to provide and manage study participants on oral treatments poses logistical challenges namely how resources are used to accommodate patient preference within constrained health economies with capacity limitations. In this pragmatic multicentre study, we aim to understand the implementation of CAB-RPV-LA administration in two settings via mixed methods to explore perspectives of participants and the clinical team delivering CAB+RPV LA. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Women, racially minoritised people and older people are chronically under-represented in HIV clinical trials so the ILANA trial has set recruitment caps to ensure recruitment of 50% women, 50% ethnically diverse people and 30% over 50 years of age to include a more representative study population. Using a mixed-methods approach, the primary objective is to identify and evaluate the critical implementation strategies for CAB+RPV LA in both hospital and community settings. Secondary objectives include evaluating feasibility and acceptability of CAB+RPV LA administration at UK clinics and community settings from the perspective of HIV care providers, nurses and representatives at community sites, evaluating barriers to implementation, the utility of implementation strategies and adherence. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval has been obtained from the Health Research Authority Research Ethics Committee (REC reference: 22/PR/0318). The dissemination strategy has been formulated with the SHARE Collaborative Community Advisory Board to maximise the impact of this work on clinical care and policy. This strategy draws on and leverages existing resources within the participating organisations, such as their academic infrastructure, professional relationships and community networks. The strategy will leverage the Public Engagement Team and press office to support dissemination of findings. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05294159.

"Because we all have to grow up": supporting adolescents in Uganda to develop core competencies to transition towards managing their HIV more independently.

INTRODUCTION: Sustaining optimal adherence is the major challenge facing adolescents living with HIV (ALHIV), particularly in low-resource settings, where "second-line" is often the last accessible treatment option. We explored the knowledge and skills adolescents need in order to maintain improved adherence behaviours, and the specific ways clinicians and caregivers may support young people to do so more independently. METHODS: We conducted individual, in-depth interviews with 20 ALHIV aged 10 to 18 years in Uganda in 2017 to 2018. All participants had recently commenced second-line treatment as part of a clinical trial. We used thematic qualitative analysis to examine adherence experiences and challenges while on first-line therapy, as well as specific supports necessary to optimise treatment-taking longer-term. RESULTS: Adherence difficulties are exacerbated by relatively rapid shifts from caregiver-led approaches during childhood, to an expectation of autonomous treatment-taking with onset of adolescence. For many participants this shift compounded their ongoing struggles managing physical side effects and poor treatment literacy. Switching to second-line typically prompted reversion back to supervised adherence, with positive impacts on self-reported adherence in the immediate term. However, this measure is unlikely to be sustainable for caregivers due to significant caregiver burden (as on first line), and provided little opportunity for clinicians to guide and develop young people's capacity to successfully adopt responsibility for their own treatment-taking. CONCLUSIONS: As ALHIV in sub-Saharan Africa are attributed increasing responsibility for treatment adherence and HIV management, they must be equipped with the core knowledge and skills required for successful, self-directed care. Young people need to be relationally supported to develop necessary "adherence competencies" within the supportive framework of a gradual "transition" period. Clinic conversations during this period should be adolescent-focussed and collaborative, and treatment-taking strategies situated within the context of their lived environments and support networks, to facilitate sustained adherence. The disclosure of adherence difficulties must be encouraged so that issues can be identified and addressed prior to treatment failure.

'You are not yourself': exploring masculinities among heterosexual African men living with HIV in London.

It is now clear that gender is an essential factor shaping the narratives of men as well as women. However, there have been few studies of the daily lives or sexual activities of heterosexual men. Hence, strategies developed to prevent the spread of the HIV virus are rarely based on detailed knowledge of the men whose behaviours they are intended to change; this is especially evident in the developing world where the epidemic is most severe. Nor do we know very much about those men who have already been diagnosed as HIV positive. Around 13 million men are now living with HIV of whom around 96% are in low or middle income countries. Migrants from developing countries also make up the majority of positive people in a number of developed countries. In the UK, for example, heterosexual activity is now responsible for about half of all new HIV diagnoses with the majority of those involved being of African origin. But almost nothing is known about the ways in which different constructions of masculinity affect their experiences of illness. This study used qualitative methods to explore the experiences of a sample of black African men who defined themselves as heterosexual and were receiving treatment for HIV and/or AIDS in London. It explored their feelings, their needs, their hopes and their desires as they negotiated their lives in the diaspora.