Going beyond 'regular and casual': development of a classification of sexual partner types to enhance partner notification for STIs.

OBJECTIVES: To develop a classification of sexual partner types for use in partner notification (PN) for STIs. METHODS: A four-step process: (1) an iterative synthesis of five sources of evidence: scoping review of social and health sciences literature on partner types; analysis of relationship types in dating apps; systematic review of PN intervention content; and review of PN guidelines; qualitative interviews with public, patients and health professionals to generate an initial comprehensive classification; (2) multidisciplinary clinical expert consultation to revise the classification; (3) piloting of the revised classification in sexual health clinics during a randomised controlled trial of PN; (4) application of the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) to identify index patients' willingness to engage in PN for each partner type. RESULTS: Five main partner types emerged from the evidence synthesis and consultation: 'established partner', 'new partner', 'occasional partner', 'one-off partner' and 'sex worker'. The types differed across several dimensions, including likely perceptions of sexual exclusivity, likelihood of sex reoccurring between index patient and sex partner. Sexual health professionals found the classification easy to operationalise. During the trial, they assigned all 3288 partners described by 2223 index patients to a category. The TDF analysis suggested that the partner types might be associated with different risks of STI reinfection, onward transmission and index patients' engagement with PN. CONCLUSIONS: We developed an evidence-informed, useable classification of five sexual partner types to underpin PN practice and other STI prevention interventions. Analysis of biomedical, psychological and social factors that distinguish different partner types shows how each could warrant a tailored PN approach. This classification could facilitate the use of partner-centred outcomes. Additional studies are needed to determine the utility of the classification to improve measurement of the impact of PN strategies and help focus resources.

How can we make self-sampling packs for sexually transmitted infections and bloodborne viruses more inclusive? A qualitative study with people with mild learning disabilities and low health literacy.

OBJECTIVES: 1.5 million people in the UK have mild to moderate learning disabilities. STIs and bloodborne viruses (BBVs) are over-represented in people experiencing broader health inequalities, which include those with mild learning disabilities. Self-managed care, including self-sampling for STIs/BBVs, is increasingly commonplace, requiring agency and health literacy. To inform the development of a partner notification trial, we explored barriers and facilitators to correct use of an STI/BBV self-sampling pack among people with mild learning disabilities. METHODS: Using purposive and convenience sampling we conducted four interviews and five gender-specific focus groups with 25 people (13 women, 12 men) with mild learning disabilities (July-August 2018) in Scotland. We balanced deductive and inductive thematic analyses of audio transcripts to explore issues associated with barriers and facilitators to correct use of the pack. RESULTS: All participants found at least one element of the pack challenging or impossible, but welcomed the opportunity to undertake sexual health screening without attending a clinic and welcomed the inclusion of condoms. Reported barriers to correct use included perceived overly complex STI/BBV information and instructions, feeling overwhelmed and the manual dexterity required for blood sampling. Many women struggled interpreting anatomical diagrams depicting vulvovaginal self-swabbing. Facilitators included pre-existing STI/BBV knowledge, familiarity with self-management, good social support and knowing that the service afforded privacy. CONCLUSION: In the first study to explore the usability of self-sampling packs for STI/BBV in people with learning disabilities, participants found it challenging to use the pack. Limiting information to the minimum required to inform decision-making, 'easy read' formats, simple language, large font sizes and simpler diagrams could improve acceptability. However, some people will remain unable to engage with self-sampling at all. To avoid widening health inequalities, face-to-face options should continue to be provided for those unable or unwilling to engage with self-managed care.

Sexual health clinic attendance and non-attendance in Britain: findings from the third National Survey of Sexual Attitudes and Lifestyles (Natsal-3).

OBJECTIVES: In Britain, sexual health clinics (SHCs) are the most common location for STI diagnosis but many people with STI risk behaviours do not attend. We estimate prevalence of SHC attendance and how this varies by sociodemographic and behavioural factors (including unsafe sex) and describe hypothetical service preferences for those reporting unsafe sex. METHODS: Complex survey analyses of data from Britain's third National Survey of Sexual Attitudes and Lifestyles, a probability survey of 15 162 people aged 16-74 years, undertaken 2010-2012. RESULTS: Overall, recent attendance (past year) was highest among those aged 16-24 years (16.6% men, 22.4% women), decreasing with age (<1.5% among those 45-74 years). Approximately 15% of sexually-active 16-74 year olds (n=1002 men; n=1253 women) reported 'unsafe sex' (condomless first sex with a new partner and/or ≥2 partners and no condom use, past year); >75% of these had not attended a SHC (past year). However, of non-attenders aged 16-44 years, 18.7% of men and 39.0% of women reported chlamydia testing (past year) with testing highest in women aged <25 years. Of those aged 16-44 years reporting unsafe sex, the majority who reported previous SHC attendance would seek STI care there, whereas the majority who had not would use general practice. CONCLUSION: While most reporting unsafe sex had not attended a SHC, many, particularly younger women, had tested for chlamydia suggesting engagement with sexual health services more broadly. Effective, diverse service provision is needed to engage those at-risk and ensure that they can attend services appropriate to their needs.

Understanding sexual healthcare seeking behaviour: why a broader research perspective is needed.

BACKGROUND: Despite effective and accessible treatments, many sexually transmitted infections (STIs) in high-income countries go untreated, causing poor sexual health for individuals and their partners. Research into STI care has tended to focus on biomedical aspects of infections using patient samples and prioritised attendance at healthcare services. This approach overlooks the broader social context of STIs and healthcare-seeking behaviours, which are important to better understand the issue of untreated infections. MAIN BODY: This paper is structured around three main arguments to improve understanding of help-seeking behaviour for STIs in order to help reduce the burden of untreated STIs for both individuals and public health. Firstly, biomedical perspectives must be combined with sociological approaches to align individual priorities with clinical insights. More research attention on understanding the subjective experiences of STI symptoms and links to healthcare-seeking behaviour is also needed. Secondly, a focus on non-attendance at healthcare services is required to address the patient-centric focus of STI research and to understand the reasons why individuals do not seek care. Finally, research using non-patient samples recruited from outside medical contexts is vital to accurately reflect the range of behaviours, beliefs and health issues within the population to ensure appropriate and effective service provision. We suggest piggy-backing other research on to existing studies as an effective way to recruit participants not defined by their patient status, and use a study recruiting a purposive non-patient sample from an existing dataset - Britain's third National Survey of Sexual Attitudes and Lifestyles (Natsal-3) as an illustrative example. CONCLUSION: STIs are common but treatable, however a range of social and cultural factors prevent access to healthcare services and contribute to the burden of untreated infection. Different conceptual and empirical approaches are needed to better understand care-seeking behaviour and reduce the gap between social and biomedical advancements in managing untreated infection.

How social representations of sexually transmitted infections influence experiences of genito-urinary symptoms and care-seeking in Britain: mixed methods study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Social understandings of sexually transmitted infections and associated symptoms and care-seeking behaviour continue to lag behind advancements in biomedical diagnostics and treatment, perpetuating the burden of disease. There is a lack of research linking perceptions, experiences and care-seeking for sexual health issues, especially research conducted outside of medical settings. We aim to explore lay perceptions of STIs and how these influence experiences of genito-urinary symptoms and associated care-seeking behaviour, in women and men in Britain. METHODS AND DESIGN: This study adopts a participant-selection variant of the explanatory sequential mixed methods design to incorporate quantitative and qualitative strands. We use data from Britain's third National Survey of Sexual Attitudes and Lifestyles (n = 15,162) to analyse national patterns of symptom experience and care-seeking, and to identify a purposive qualitative sample. Semi-structured interviews (n = 27) following up with survey participants include a novel flash card activity providing qualitative data about infection perceptions, symptom experiences and decisions about healthcare. Quantitative and qualitative data are analysed separately using complex survey analyses and principles of Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis respectively. Data are then integrated in a subsequent phase of analysis using matrices to compare, contrast and identify silences from each method. DISCUSSION: This is an ongoing mixed methods study collecting, analysing and synthesising linked data from a national survey and follow-up semi-structured interviews. It adds explanatory potential to existing national survey data and is likely to inform future surveys about sexual health. Given the current uncertainty around service provision in Britain, this study provides timely data about symptom experiences and care-seeking behaviour which may inform future commissioning of sexual healthcare.

Understanding the barriers and facilitators to using self-sampling packs for sexually transmitted infections and blood-borne viruses: Thematic analyses for intervention optimization.

PURPOSE: Self-sampling packs for sexually transmitted infections (STIs) and blood-borne viruses (BBVs) are widely offered. There are ongoing problems with reach and sample return rates. The packs have arisen without formal intervention development. This paper illustrates initial steps of an intervention optimization process to improve the packs. METHODS: Eleven focus groups and seven interviews were conducted with convenience samples of patients recruited from sexual health clinics and members of the public (n = 56). To enable intervention optimization, firstly, we conducted an inductive appraisal of the behavioural system of using the pack to understand meaningful constituent behavioural domains. Subsequently, we conducted a thematic analysis of barriers and facilitators to enacting each sequential behavioural domain in preparation for future behaviour change wheel analysis. RESULTS: Overall, we found that self-sampling packs were acceptable. Participants understood their overall logic and value as a pragmatic intervention that simultaneously facilitated and reduced barriers to individuals being tested for STIs and BBVs. However, at the level of each behavioural domain (e.g., reading leaflets, returning samples) problems with the pack were identified, as well as a series of potential optimizations, which might widen the reach of self-sampling and increase the return of viable samples. CONCLUSIONS: This paper provides an example of a pragmatic approach to optimizing an intervention already widely offered globally. The paper demonstrates the added value health psychological approaches offer; conceptualizing interventions in behavioural terms, pinpointing granular behavioural problems amenable for systematic further improvement.

A qualitative process evaluation using the behaviour change wheel approach: Did a whole genome sequence report form (SRF) used to reduce nosocomial SARS-CoV-2 within UK hospitals operate as anticipated?

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to conduct a process evaluation of a whole-genome sequence report form (SRF) used to reduce nosocomial SARS-CoV-2 through changing infection prevention and control (IPC) behaviours within the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We used a three-staged design. Firstly, we described and theorized the purported content of the SRF using the behaviour change wheel (BCW). Secondly, we used inductive thematic analysis of one-to-one interviews (n = 39) to explore contextual accounts of using the SRF. Thirdly, further deductive analysis gauged support for the intervention working as earlier anticipated. RESULTS: It was possible to theorize the SRF using the BCW approach and visualize it within a simple logic model. Inductive thematic analyses identified the SRF's acceptability, ease of use and perceived effectiveness. However, major challenges to embedding it in routine practice during the unfolding COVID-19 crisis were reported. Notwithstanding this insight, deductive analysis showed support for the putative intervention functions 'Education', 'Persuasion' and 'Enablement'; behaviour change techniques '1.2 Problem solving', '2.6 Biofeedback', '2.7 Feedback on outcomes of behaviour' and '7.1 Prompts and cues'; and theoretical domains framework domains 'Knowledge' and 'Behavioural regulation'. CONCLUSIONS: Our process evaluation of the SRF, using the BCW approach to describe and theorize its content, provided granular support for the SRF working to change IPC behaviours as anticipated. However, our complementary inductive thematic analysis highlighted the importance of the local context in constraining its routine use. For SRFs to reach their full potential in reducing nosocomial infections, further implementation research is needed.

Using the behaviour change wheel approach to optimize self-sampling packs for sexually transmitted infection and blood borne viruses.

PURPOSE: This paper describes the process of optimizing a widely offered intervention-self-sampling packs for sexually transmitted infections (STIs) and blood borne viruses (BBVs). We drew upon the behaviour change wheel (BCW) approach, incorporating the theoretical domains framework (TDF) and the behaviour change technique taxonomy (BCTTv1) to systematically specify potential intervention components that may optimize the packs. METHODS: A BCW analysis built upon prior thematic analyses of qualitative data collected through focus groups and interviews with members of the public and people recruited from sexual health clinics in Glasgow and London (n = 56). Salient barriers and facilitators to specific sequential behavioural domains associated with the wider behavioural system of pack use were subjected to further analyses, coding them in relation to the TDF, the BCW's intervention functions, and finally specifying potential optimisation using behaviour change techniques (BCTs). RESULTS: Our TDF analysis suggested that across the overall behavioural system of pack use, the most important theoretical domains were 'beliefs about consequences' and 'memory, attention and decision-making'. BCW analysis on the overall pack suggested useful intervention functions should focus on 'environmental restructuring', 'persuasion', 'enablement', 'education' and 'modelling'. Specific ways of optimizing the intervention were also described in relation to potentially useful BCTs. CONCLUSIONS: Through a detailed behavioural analysis and the TDF and wider BCW approach built on earlier qualitative work, we provide a systematic approach to optimizing an existing intervention. The approach enabled the specification of highly specific, evidence-based, and theoretically informed recommendations for intervention optimization.

Protocol for the COG-UK hospital-onset COVID-19 infection (HOCI) multicentre interventional clinical study: evaluating the efficacy of rapid genome sequencing of SARS-CoV-2 in limiting the spread of COVID-19 in UK NHS hospitals.

OBJECTIVES: Nosocomial transmission of SARS-CoV-2 has been a significant cause of mortality in National Health Service (NHS) hospitals during the COVID-19 pandemic. The COG-UK Consortium Hospital-Onset COVID-19 Infections (COG-UK HOCI) study aims to evaluate whether the use of rapid whole-genome sequencing of SARS-CoV-2, supported by a novel probabilistic reporting methodology, can inform infection prevention and control (IPC) practice within NHS hospital settings. DESIGN: Multicentre, prospective, interventional, superiority study. SETTING: 14 participating NHS hospitals over winter-spring 2020/2021 in the UK. PARTICIPANTS: Eligible patients must be admitted to hospital with first-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 PCR-positive test result >48 hour from time of admission, where COVID-19 diagnosis not suspected on admission. The projected sample size is 2380 patients. INTERVENTION: The intervention is the return of a sequence report, within 48 hours in one phase (rapid local lab processing) and within 5-10 days in a second phase (mimicking central lab), comparing the viral genome from an eligible study participant with others within and outside the hospital site. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcomes are incidence of Public Health England (PHE)/IPC-defined SARS-CoV-2 hospital-acquired infection during the baseline and two interventional phases, and proportion of hospital-onset cases with genomic evidence of transmission linkage following implementation of the intervention where such linkage was not suspected by initial IPC investigation. Secondary outcomes include incidence of hospital outbreaks, with and without sequencing data; actual and desirable changes to IPC actions; periods of healthcare worker (HCW) absence. Health economic analysis will be conducted to determine cost benefit of the intervention. A process evaluation using qualitative interviews with HCWs will be conducted alongside the study. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN50212645. Pre-results stage. This manuscript is based on protocol V.6.0. 2 September 2021.

Accelerated partner therapy contact tracing for people with chlamydia (LUSTRUM): a crossover cluster-randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Accelerated partner therapy has shown promise in improving contact tracing. We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of accelerated partner therapy in addition to usual contact tracing compared with usual practice alone in heterosexual people with chlamydia, using a biological primary outcome measure. METHODS: We did a crossover cluster-randomised controlled trial in 17 sexual health clinics (clusters) across England and Scotland. Participants were heterosexual people aged 16 years or older with a positive Chlamydia trachomatis test result, or a clinical diagnosis of conditions for which presumptive chlamydia treatment and contact tracing are initially provided, and their sexual partners. We allocated phase order for clinics through random permutation within strata. In the control phase, participants received usual care (health-care professional advised the index patient to tell their sexual partner[s] to attend clinic for sexually transmitted infection screening and treatment). In the intervention phase, participants received usual care plus an offer of accelerated partner therapy (health-care professional assessed sexual partner[s] by telephone, then sent or gave the index patient antibiotics and sexually transmitted infection self-sampling kits for their sexual partner[s]). Each phase lasted 6 months, with a 2-week washout at crossover. The primary outcome was the proportion of index patients with a positive C trachomatis test result at 12-24 weeks after contact tracing consultation. Secondary outcomes included proportions and types of sexual partners treated. Analysis was done by intention-to-treat, fitting random effects logistic regression models. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, 15996256. FINDINGS: Between Oct 24, 2018, and Nov 17, 2019, 1536 patients were enrolled in the intervention phase and 1724 were enrolled in the control phase. All clinics completed both phases. In total, 4807 sexual partners were reported, of whom 1636 (34%) were steady established partners. Overall, 293 (19%) of 1536 index patients chose accelerated partner therapy for a total of 305 partners, of whom 248 (81%) accepted. 666 (43%) of 1536 index patients in the intervention phase and 800 (46%) of 1724 in the control phase were tested for C trachomatis at 12-24 weeks after contact tracing consultation; 31 (4·7%) in the intervention phase and 53 (6·6%) in the control phase had a positive C trachomatis test result (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0·66 [95% CI 0·41 to 1·04]; p=0·071; marginal absolute difference -2·2% [95% CI -4·7 to 0·3]). Among index patients with treatment status recorded, 775 (88·0%) of 881 patients in the intervention phase and 760 (84·6%) of 898 in the control phase had at least one treated sexual partner at 2-4 weeks after contact tracing consultation (adjusted OR 1·27 [95% CI 0·96 to 1·68]; p=0·10; marginal absolute difference 2·7% [95% CI -0·5 to 6·0]). No clinically significant harms were reported. INTERPRETATION: Although the evidence that the intervention reduces repeat infection was not conclusive, the trial results suggest that accelerated partner therapy can be safely offered as a contact tracing option and is also likely to be cost saving. Future research should find ways to increase uptake of accelerated partner therapy and develop alternative interventions for one-off sexual partners. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research.

Effectiveness of rapid SARS-CoV-2 genome sequencing in supporting infection control for hospital-onset COVID-19 infection: Multicentre, prospective study.

Background: Viral sequencing of SARS-CoV-2 has been used for outbreak investigation, but there is limited evidence supporting routine use for infection prevention and control (IPC) within hospital settings. Methods: We conducted a prospective non-randomised trial of sequencing at 14 acute UK hospital trusts. Sites each had a 4-week baseline data collection period, followed by intervention periods comprising 8 weeks of 'rapid' (<48 hr) and 4 weeks of 'longer-turnaround' (5-10 days) sequencing using a sequence reporting tool (SRT). Data were collected on all hospital-onset COVID-19 infections (HOCIs; detected ≥48 hr from admission). The impact of the sequencing intervention on IPC knowledge and actions, and on the incidence of probable/definite hospital-acquired infections (HAIs), was evaluated. Results: A total of 2170 HOCI cases were recorded from October 2020 to April 2021, corresponding to a period of extreme strain on the health service, with sequence reports returned for 650/1320 (49.2%) during intervention phases. We did not detect a statistically significant change in weekly incidence of HAIs in longer-turnaround (incidence rate ratio 1.60, 95% CI 0.85-3.01; p=0.14) or rapid (0.85, 0.48-1.50; p=0.54) intervention phases compared to baseline phase. However, IPC practice was changed in 7.8 and 7.4% of all HOCI cases in rapid and longer-turnaround phases, respectively, and 17.2 and 11.6% of cases where the report was returned. In a 'per-protocol' sensitivity analysis, there was an impact on IPC actions in 20.7% of HOCI cases when the SRT report was returned within 5 days. Capacity to respond effectively to insights from sequencing was breached in most sites by the volume of cases and limited resources. Conclusions: While we did not demonstrate a direct impact of sequencing on the incidence of nosocomial transmission, our results suggest that sequencing can inform IPC response to HOCIs, particularly when returned within 5 days. Funding: COG-UK is supported by funding from the Medical Research Council (MRC) part of UK Research & Innovation (UKRI), the National Institute of Health Research (NIHR) (grant code: MC_PC_19027), and Genome Research Limited, operating as the Wellcome Sanger Institute. Clinical trial number: NCT04405934.

Accelerated partner therapy (APT) partner notification for people with Chlamydia trachomatis: protocol for the Limiting Undetected Sexually Transmitted infections to RedUce Morbidity (LUSTRUM) APT cross-over cluster randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Partner notification (PN) is a process aiming to identify, test and treat the sex partners of people (index patients) with sexually transmitted infections (STIs). Accelerated partner therapy (APT) is a PN method whereby healthcare professionals assess sex partners, by telephone consultation, before giving the index patient antibiotics and STI self-sampling kits to deliver to their sex partner(s). The Limiting Undetected Sexually Transmitted infections to RedUce Morbidity programme aims to determine the effectiveness of APT in heterosexual women and men with chlamydia and determine whether APT could affect Chlamydia trachomatis transmission at population level. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This protocol describes a cross-over cluster randomised controlled trial of APT, offered as an additional PN method, compared with standard PN. The trial is accompanied by an economic evaluation, transmission dynamic modelling and a qualitative process evaluation involving patients, partners and healthcare professionals. Clusters are 17 sexual health clinics in areas of England and Scotland with contrasting patient demographics. We will recruit 5440 heterosexual women and men with chlamydia, aged ≥16 years.The primary outcome is the proportion of index patients testing positive for C. trachomatis 12-16 weeks after the PN consultation. Secondary outcomes include: proportion of sex partners treated; cost effectiveness; model-predicted chlamydia prevalence; experiences of APT.The primary outcome analysis will be by intention-to-treat, fitting random effects logistic regression models that account for clustering of index patients within clinics and trial periods. The transmission dynamic model will be used to predict change in chlamydia prevalence following APT. The economic evaluation will use mathematical modelling outputs, taking a health service perspective. Qualitative data will be analysed using interpretative phenomenological analysis and framework analysis. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This protocol received ethical approval from London-Chelsea Research Ethics Committee (18/LO/0773). Findings will be published with open access licences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN15996256.

Help-seeking for genitourinary symptoms: a mixed methods study from Britain's Third National Survey of Sexual Attitudes and Lifestyles (Natsal-3).

OBJECTIVES: Quantify non-attendance at sexual health clinics and explore help-seeking strategies for genitourinary symptoms. DESIGN: Sequential mixed methods using survey data and semistructured interviews. SETTING: General population in Britain. PARTICIPANTS: 1403 participants (1182 women) from Britain's Third National Survey of Sexual Attitudes and Lifestyles (Natsal-3; undertaken 2010-2012), aged 16-44 years who experienced specific genitourinary symptoms (past 4 weeks), of whom 27 (16 women) who reported they had never attended a sexual health clinic also participated in semistructured interviews, conducted May 2014-March 2015. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: From survey data, non-attendance at sexual health clinic (past year) and preferred service for STI care; semistructured interview domains were STI social representations, symptom experiences, help-seeking responses and STI stigma. RESULTS: Most women (85.9% (95% CI 83.7 to 87.9)) and men (87.6% (95% CI 82.3 to 91.5)) who reported genitourinary symptoms in Natsal-3 had not attended a sexual health clinic in the past year. Around half of these participants cited general practice (GP) as their preferred hypothetical service for STI care (women: 58.5% (95% CI 55.2% to 61.6%); men: 54.3% (95% CI 47.1% to 61.3%)). Semistructured interviews elucidated four main responses to symptoms: not seeking healthcare, seeking information to self-diagnose and self-treat, seeking care at non-specialist services and seeking care at sexual health clinics. Collectively, responses suggested individuals sought to gain control over their symptoms, and they prioritised emotional reassurance over accessing medical expertise. Integrating survey and interview data strengthened the evidence that participants preferred their general practitioner for STI care and extended understanding of help-seeking strategies. CONCLUSIONS: Help-seeking is important to access appropriate healthcare for genitourinary symptoms. Most participants did not attend a sexual health clinic but sought help from other sources. This study supports current service provision options in Britain, facilitating individual autonomy about where to seek help.

STI Risk Perception in the British Population and How It Relates to Sexual Behaviour and STI Healthcare Use: Findings From a Cross-sectional Survey (Natsal-3).

BACKGROUND: We investigated how STI risk perception relates to behavioural STI risk and STI healthcare (sexual health clinic attendance/chlamydia testing) in the British population. METHODS: Natsal-3, a national probability-sample survey undertaken 2010-12, included 8397 sexually-active 16-44 year-olds. Participants rated their risk of STIs (excluding HIV) given their current sexual lifestyle. Urine from a randomly-selected sub-sample of participants (n = 4550) was tested for prevalent STIs (Chlamydia trachomatis, Neisseria gonorrhoeae, Mycoplasma genitalium, Trichomonas vaginalis). FINDINGS: Most men (64% (95% CI: 62-66)) and women (73% (72-74)) rated themselves as not at all at risk of STIs, 30% (29-32) men and 23% (22-25) women self-rated as not very much, and 5% (5-6) men and 3% (3-4) women as greatly/quite a lot at risk. Although those reporting STI risk behaviours were more likely to perceive themselves as at risk, > 70% men and > 85% women classified as having had unsafe sex in the past year, and similar proportions of those with a prevalent STI, perceived themselves as not at all or not very much at risk. Increased risk perception was associated with greater STI healthcare-use (past year), although not after adjusting for sexual behaviour, indicating in a mediation analysis that risk perception was neither necessary or sufficient for seeking care Furthermore, 58% (48-67) men and 31% (22-41) women who had unsafe sex (past year) and rated themselves as greatly/quite a lot at risk had neither attended nor tested. INTERPRETATION: Many people at risk of STIs in Britain underestimated their risk, and many who correctly perceived themselves to be at risk had not recently accessed STI healthcare. Health promotion needs to address this mismatch and ensure that people access healthcare appropriate to their needs.

A systematic review of contemporary models of shared HIV care and HIV in primary care in high-income settings.

HIV shared care is uncommon in the UK although shared care could be a beneficial model of care. We review the literature on HIV shared care to determine current practice and clinical, economic and patient satisfaction outcomes. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, NICE Evidence, Cochrane collaboration, Google and websites of the British HIV Association, Aidsmap, Public Health England, World Health Organization and Terrence Higgins Trust using relevant search terms in August 2014. Studies published after 2000, from healthcare settings comparable to the UK that described links between primary care and specialised HIV services were included and compared using principles of the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme and Authority, Accuracy, Coverage, Objectivity, Date, Significance frameworks. Three of the nine included models reported clinical or patient satisfaction outcomes but data collection and analyses were inadequate. None reported economic outcomes although some provided financial costings. Facilitators of shared care included robust clinical protocols, training and timely communication. Few published examples of HIV shared care exist and quality of evidence is poor. There is no consistent association with improved clinical outcomes, cost effectiveness or acceptability. Models are context specific, driven by local need, although some generalisable features could inform novel service delivery. Further evaluative research is needed to determine optimal components of shared HIV care.

How can planning add value to obesity prevention programmes? A qualitative study of planning and planners in the Healthy Towns programme in England.

The planning profession has been advocated as an untapped resource for obesity prevention, but little is known about how planners view their roles and responsibilities in this area. This paper investigates the role of planners in the Healthy Towns programme in England, and explores the limits and potential for obesity prevention within planning policy and practice. Using a qualitative approach, 23 planning stakeholders were interviewed, identifying the potential for planning in public health, particularly the 'health proofing' of local planning policy. National and local governments should better align planning and health policies to support collaboration between planners and public health practitioners.