Mental health and structural harm: a qualitative study of sexual minority men's experiences of mental healthcare in Toronto, Canada.

Compared to the general population, sexual minority men report poorer mental health outcomes and higher mental healthcare utilisation. However, they also report more unmet mental health needs. To better understand this phenomenon, we conducted qualitative interviews with 24 sexual minority men to explore the structural factors shaping their encounters with mental healthcare in Toronto, Canada. Interviews were analysed using grounded theory. Many participants struggled to access mental healthcare and felt more marginalised and distressed because of two interrelated sets of barriers. The first were general barriers, hurdles to mental healthcare not exclusive to sexual minorities. These included financial and logistical obstacles, the prominence of psychiatry and the biomedical model, and unsatisfactory provider encounters. The second were sexual minority barriers, obstacles explicitly rooted in heterosexism and homophobia sometimes intersecting with other forms of marginality. These included experiencing discrimination and distrust, and limited sexual minority affirming options. Discussions of general barriers outweighed those of sexual minority barriers, demonstrating the health consequences of structural harms in the absence of overt structural stigma. Healthcare inaccessibility, income insecurity and the high cost of living are fostering poor mental health among sexual minority men. Research must consider the upstream policy changes necessary to counteract these harms.

Population-Level Sexual Mixing According to HIV Status and Preexposure Prophylaxis Use Among Men Who Have Sex With Men in Montreal, Canada: Implications for HIV Prevention.

Using cross-sectional survey data (Engage, 2017-2018) from 1,137 men who have sex with men, ≥16 years old, in Montreal, we compared observed human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) seroconcordance in previous-6-months' sexual partnerships with what would have been observed by chance if zero individuals serosorted. Of 5 recent partnerships where both individuals were HIV-negative, we compared observed concordance in preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) use with the counterfactual if zero individuals selected partners based on PrEP use. We estimated the concordance by chance using a balancing-partnerships approach assuming proportionate mixing. HIV-positive respondents had a higher proportion of HIV-positive partners (66.4%, 95% confidence interval (CI): 64.0, 68.6) than by chance (23.9%, 95% CI: 23.1, 24.7). HIV-negative respondents (both on and not on PrEP) had higher proportions of HIV-negative partners (82.9% (95% CI: 81.1, 84.7) and 90.7% (95% CI: 89.6, 91.7), respectively) compared with by chance (76.1%, 95% CI: 75.3, 76.9); however, those on PrEP had a higher proportion of HIV-positive partners than those not on PrEP (17.1% (95% CI: 15.3, 18.9) vs. 9.3% (95% CI: 8.3, 10.4). Those on PrEP also had a higher proportion of partners on PrEP among their HIV-negative partners (50.6%, 95% CI: 42.5, 58.8) than by chance (28.5%, 95% CI: 27.5, 29.4). The relationship between PrEP and sexual-mixing patterns demonstrated by less population-level serosorting among those on PrEP and PrEP-matching warrants consideration during PrEP roll-out.

A tale of two epidemics: gay men's mental health and the biomedicalisation of HIV prevention and care in Toronto.

There is mounting urgency regarding the mental health of gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men (GBM). We examined how GBM are understanding the relationship between HIV and their mental health given the increasing biomedicalisation of HIV prevention and care. Our Grounded Theory analysis derived from qualitative interviews with 24 GBM living in Toronto, Canada, including both HIV-negative and HIV-positive men. Participants understood biomedical advances, such as undetectable viral load and pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP), as providing some relief from HIV-related distress. However, they offered ambivalent perspectives on the biomedicalisation of HIV. Some considered non-HIV-specific stressors (e.g. unemployment, racial discrimination) more significant than HIV-related concerns. These men expressed HIV-related distress as being under control due to biomedical advances or as always negligible when compared to non-HIV-specific stressors. Others emphasised the ongoing mental health implications of HIV (e.g. enduring risk and stigma). We describe a tension between optimistic responses to biomedicine's ability to ease the psychosocial burdens associated with HIV and the inability for biomedicine to address the social and economic determinants driving the dual epidemics of HIV and mental distress amongst GBM. We argue for more socio-material analysis over further sexual behavioural analysis of GBM mental health disparities.

Use of HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis among urban Canadian gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men: a cross-sectional analysis of the Engage cohort study.

BACKGROUND: In Canada, gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men (GBM) are disproportionately affected by HIV. Our objective was to describe access to HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) and identify factors associated with not using PrEP among self-reported HIV-negative or HIV-unknown GBM. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional analysis of the Engage study cohort. Between 2017 and 2019, sexually active GBM aged 16 years or more in Montréal, Toronto and Vancouver were recruited via respondent-driven sampling (RDS). Participation included testing for HIV and sexually transmitted and blood-borne infections, and completion of a questionnaire. We examined PrEP access using a health care services model and fit RDS-adjusted logistic regressions to determine correlates of not using PrEP among those for whom PrEP was clinically recommended and who were aware of the intervention. RESULTS: A total of 2449 GBM were recruited, of whom 2008 were HIV-negative or HIV-unknown; 1159 (511 in Montréal, 247 in Toronto and 401 in Vancouver) met clinical recommendations for PrEP. Of the 1159, 1100 were aware of PrEP (RDS-adjusted proportion: Montréal 84.6%, Toronto 94.2%, Vancouver 92.7%), 678 had felt the need for PrEP in the previous 6 months (RDS-adjusted proportion: Montréal 39.2%, Toronto 56.1%, Vancouver 49.0%), 406 had tried to access PrEP in the previous 6 months (RDS-adjusted proportion: Montréal 20.6%, Toronto 33.2%, Vancouver 29.6%) and 319 had used PrEP in the previous 6 months (RDS-adjusted proportion: Montréal 14.5%, Toronto 21.6%, Vancouver 21.8%). Not using PrEP was associated with several factors, including not feeling at high enough risk, viewing PrEP as not completely effective, not having a primary care provider and lacking medication insurance. INTERPRETATION: Although half of GBM met clinical recommendations for PrEP, less than a quarter of them reported use. Despite high levels of awareness, a programmatic response that addresses PrEP-related perceptions and health care system barriers is needed to scale up PrEP access among GBM in Canada.