Testing and healthcare seeking behavior preceding HIV diagnosis among migrant and non-migrant individuals living in the Netherlands: Directions for early-case finding.

OBJECTIVES: To assess differences in socio-demographics, HIV testing and healthcare seeking behavior between individuals diagnosed late and those diagnosed early after HIV-acquisition. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study among recently HIV-diagnosed migrant and non-migrant individuals living in the Netherlands. METHODS: Participants self-completed a questionnaire on socio-demographics, HIV-testing and healthcare seeking behavior preceding HIV diagnosis between 2013-2015. Using multivariable logistic regression, socio-demographic determinants of late diagnosis were explored. Variables on HIV-infection, testing and access to care preceding HIV diagnosis were compared between those diagnosed early and those diagnosed late using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: We included 143 individuals with early and 101 with late diagnosis, of whom respectively 59/143 (41%) and 54/101 (53%) were migrants. Late diagnosis was significantly associated with older age and being heterosexual. Before HIV diagnosis, 89% of those with early and 62% of those with late diagnosis had ever been tested for HIV-infection (p<0.001), and respectively 99% and 97% reported healthcare usage in the Netherlands in the two years preceding HIV diagnosis (p = 0.79). Individuals diagnosed late most frequently visited a general practitioner (72%) or dentist (62%), and 20% had been hospitalized preceding diagnosis. In these settings, only in respectively 20%, 2%, and 6% HIV-testing was discussed. CONCLUSION: A large proportion of people diagnosed late had previously tested for HIV and had high levels of healthcare usage. For earlier-case finding of HIV it therefore seems feasible to successfully roll out interventions within the existing healthcare system. Simultaneously, efforts should be made to encourage future repeated or routine HIV testing among individuals whenever they undergo an HIV test.

Disparities in access to and use of HIV-related health services in the Netherlands by migrant status and sexual orientation: a cross-sectional study among people recently diagnosed with HIV infection.

BACKGROUND: Migrants often face barriers to accessing healthcare. We examined disparities in access to and use of HIV-related health services between migrant and non-migrant people recently diagnosed with HIV living in the Netherlands, taken into account sexual orientation. Also, we examined differences in experiences in living with HIV between these groups. METHODS: We used a questionnaire and clinical data collected between July 2013 and June 2015 among migrant and non-migrant participants of the European cross-sectional aMASE (Advancing Migrant Access to health Services in Europe) study in the Netherlands. Using univariable logistic regression analyses, we compared outcomes on between migrants and non-migrants, stratified by sexual orientation (with non-migrant men having sex with men [MSM] as the reference group). RESULTS: We included 77 migrant MSM, 115 non-migrant MSM, 21 migrant heterosexual men, 14 non-migrant heterosexual men and 20 migrant women. In univariable analyses, all heterosexual groups were less likely to ever have had an HIV-negative test before their diagnosis and were more likely to be diagnosed late than non-migrant MSM. All migrant groups were more likely to have experienced difficulties accessing general healthcare in the Netherlands and were less likely to have heard of post-exposure prophylaxis than non-migrant MSM. Migrants frequently reported uncertainty about their rights to healthcare and language barriers. Most (93%) participants visited a healthcare facility in the 2 years before HIV diagnosis but only in 41% an HIV test was discussed during that visit (no statistical difference between groups). Migrant heterosexuals were more likely to have missed appointments at their HIV clinic due to the travel costs than non-migrant MSM. Migrant MSM and women were more likely to have experienced HIV discrimination in the Netherlands than non-migrant MSM. CONCLUSION: Disparities in access to and use of HIV-related health services and experiences exist by migrant status but also by sexual orientation. Our data suggests heterosexual men and women may particularly benefit from improved access to HIV testing (e.g., through provider-initiated testing), while migrant MSM may benefit from improved access to HIV prevention interventions (e.g., pre-exposure prophylaxis).

Usage of purchased self-tests for HIV infections among migrants living in the UK, France and the Netherlands: a cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVES: Self-tests are performed and interpreted autonomously by a person without involving a healthcare professional or a certified laboratory. To gain insight into the usage of purchased HIV self-tests (HIVST) among migrants living in high-income countries, we studied the prevalence and determinants of HIVST usage among migrants living in the UK, France and the Netherlands. METHODS: We used web-based questionnaire data collected between April 2014 and July 2015 among migrants living in the UK, France and the Netherlands who participated in the cross-sectional community survey of the aMASE (advancing Migrant Access to health Services in Europe) study. HIVST usage in the preceding 12 months and the corresponding 95% CIs were calculated. Using univariate logistic regression analyses, determinants of HIVST usage were evaluated. RESULTS: Among 477 migrants living in the UK (n=235), France (n=98) and the Netherlands (n=144), HIVST usage in the preceding 12 months was 1.89% (9/477, 95% CI 0.66% to 3.11%). As all nine HIVST users were men who have sex with men (MSM), we restricted our univariate analyses to MSM (n=240). HIVST usage was borderline significantly lower among MSM living in France and the Netherlands compared with those living in the UK (UK: reference; France: OR 0.20, 95% CI 0.03 to 1.14; the Netherlands: OR 0.06, 95% CI 0.00 to 1.05). Age, region of birth, educational level, registration at a general practitioner, recent number of male sexual partners and hard drug use were not associated with HIVST usage among MSM. CONCLUSIONS: HIVST usage among migrants from the UK, France and the Netherlands was relatively low between 2014 and 2015 but higher among migrant MSM. To increase HIV testing rates among migrants, programmes need to be developed to promote HIVST among this group. Also, as more countries approve usage of HIVST, systems need to be established to ensure linkage to confirmatory testing and care following a positive test.

Physicians' preparedness for pre-exposure prophylaxis: results of an online survey in Belgium.

Background Physicians have a crucial role in the implementation and scale up of pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP). The objective of this study is to examine Belgian physicians' PrEP knowledge, concerns, acceptance and their willingness to prescribe PrEP. METHODS: A cross-sectional online survey was conducted between March and June 2016. Dissemination targeted Belgian primary care physicians (PCPs) and HIV specialists. Sociodemographic characteristics, experience with HIV and PrEP, self-assessed PrEP knowledge, concerns about PrEP, and PrEP acceptance were stratified according to professional background. Associations with willingness to prescribe PrEP were examined using univariable and multivariable binary logistic regression analyses. RESULTS: In total, 333 completed surveys were included in the analysis. Sixty-two physicians (18.6%) scored their knowledge of PrEP to be good, 263 (79.0%) had an accepting attitude towards PrEP and 198 (59.5%) were willing to prescribe PrEP if approved in Belgium. HIV specialists consistently reported having better knowledge of PrEP, less concerns and a more accepting attitude towards PrEP than PCPs. In multivariable logistic regression analysis, higher PrEP knowledge (OR 2.4; 95%CI: 1.0-5.7) and higher PrEP acceptance (OR: 3.8; 95%CI: 2.1-6.8) remained significantly associated with the willingness to prescribe PrEP. CONCLUSIONS: HIV specialists are better prepared to provide PrEP than PCPs in Belgium. Interventions to improve PrEP knowledge and acceptance among all providers are needed. The role of PCPs could be very important in optimising the rollout of PrEP, but additional training and guidelines will be needed.

Integrating hepatitis B, hepatitis C and HIV screening into tuberculosis entry screening for migrants in the Netherlands, 2013 to 2015.

We evaluated uptake and diagnostic outcomes of voluntary hepatitis B (HBV) and C virus (HCV) screening offered during routine tuberculosis entry screening to migrants in Gelderland and Amsterdam, the Netherlands, between 2013 and 2015. In Amsterdam, HIV screening was also offered. Overall, 54% (461/859) accepted screening. Prevalence of chronic HBV infection (HBsAg-positive) and HCV exposure (anti-HCV-positive) in Gelderland was 4.48% (9/201; 95% confidence interval (CI): 2.37-8.29) and 0.99% (2/203; 95% CI: 0.27-3.52), respectively, all infections were newly diagnosed. Prevalence of chronic HBV infection, HCV exposure and chronic HCV infection (HCV RNA-positive) in Amsterdam was 0.39% (1/256; 95% CI: 0.07-2.18), 1.17% (3/256; 95% CI: 0.40-3.39) and 0.39% (1/256; 95% CI: 0.07-2.18), respectively, with all chronic HBV/HCV infections previously diagnosed. No HIV infections were found. In univariate analyses, newly diagnosed chronic HBV infection was more likely in participants migrating for reasons other than work or study (4.35% vs 0.83%; odds ratio (OR) = 5.45; 95% CI: 1.12-26.60) and was less likely in participants in Amsterdam than Gelderland (0.00% vs 4.48%; OR = 0.04; 95% CI: 0.00-0.69). Regional differences in HBV prevalence might be explained by differences in the populations entering compulsory tuberculosis screening. Prescreening selection of migrants based on risk factors merits further exploration.

The Acceptability of Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis: Beliefs of Health-Care Professionals Working in Sexually Transmitted Infections Clinics and HIV Treatment Centers.

BACKGROUND: Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is highly effective for preventing HIV infections, but is not yet implemented in the Netherlands. As the attitudes of health-care professionals toward PrEP can influence future PrEP implementation, we studied PrEP knowledge and beliefs and their association with PrEP acceptability among professionals in clinics for sexually transmitted infection (STI professionals) and HIV treatment centers (HIV specialists). In addition, we examined preferred regimens, attitudes toward providing PrEP to key populations and to reimbursement of PrEP costs. METHODS: An online questionnaire was distributed among 24 public health STI clinics and 27 HIV treatment centers nationwide in the Netherlands between January and August 2015. The acceptability of PrEP was measured on a 7-point Likert scale ranging from 1 = low to 7 = high acceptability. Univariable and multivariable linear regression analyses were used to explore associations between demographic characteristics, PrEP knowledge, beliefs about PrEP, and PrEP acceptability. RESULTS: In total, 209 people (143 STI professionals and 66 HIV specialists) completed the questionnaire. The mean acceptability of PrEP implementation was 4.28 (SD 1.68) among STI professionals and 4.42 (SD 1.67) among HIV specialists. The mean score on self-perceived knowledge related to PrEP efficacy was 3.90 (SD 1.57) among STI professionals and 5.68 (SD 1.08) among HIV specialists (p-value of <0.001). Beliefs associated with lower PrEP acceptability among both groups were the fear that PrEP use will lead to a decrease in condom use and an increase in STI, the high costs of PrEP and ethical issues regarding prescribing antiretroviral medication to healthy individuals. No preference for a daily or an event-driven regimen was detected. Most participants deemed the following groups to be eligible for PrEP: men who have sex with men (MSM) who regularly get post-exposure prophylaxis, MSM who never used condoms with casual partners and MSM with an HIV-positive partner with a detectable viral load. Over half of the participants indicated that PrEP users should partly (54.1%) or fully (35.4%) pay the costs of PrEP. CONCLUSION: In 2015, PrEP acceptability was only moderate among Dutch STI professionals and HIV specialists, which is far from an optimal setting. Addressing barriers to PrEP acceptability in educational programs for various types of health-care professionals is needed to successfully implement PrEP in the Netherlands.

Factors Associated With Access to HIV Testing and Primary Care Among Migrants Living in Europe: Cross-Sectional Survey.

BACKGROUND: There is a heavy and disproportionate burden of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection among migrant communities living in Europe. Despite this, the published evidence related to HIV testing, prevention, and treatment needs for migrants is sparse. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to identify the factors associated with access to primary care and HIV testing among migrant groups living in Europe. METHODS: A Web-based survey (available in 14 languages) was open to all people aged 18 years and older, living outside their country of birth in the World Health Organization (WHO) European area. Community organizations in 9 countries promoted the survey to migrant groups, focusing on those at a higher risk of HIV (sub-Saharan Africans, Latin Americans, gay or bisexual men, and people who inject drugs). Multivariable analysis examined factors associated with access to primary care and previous history of an HIV test. RESULTS: In total, 559 women, 395 heterosexual men, and 674 gay or bisexual men were included in the analysis, and 68.1% (359/527) of women, 59.5% (220/371) of heterosexual men, and 89.6% (596/664) of gay or bisexual men had tested for HIV. Low perceived risk was the reason given for not testing by 62.3% (43/69) of gay or bisexual men and 83.3% (140/168) of women and heterosexual men who reported never having tested for HIV. Access to primary care was >60% in all groups. Access to primary care was strongly positively associated with living in Northern Europe compared with Southern Europe (women: adjusted odds ratio, aOR 34.56 [95% CI 11.58-101]; heterosexual men: aOR 6.93 [95% CI 2.49-19.35], and gay or bisexual men: aOR 2.53 [95% CI 1.23-5.19]), whereas those with temporary residency permits were less likely to have access to primary care (women: aOR 0.41 [95% CI 0.21-0.80] and heterosexual men: aOR 0.24 [95% CI 0.10-0.54] only). Women who had experience of forced sex (aOR 3.53 [95% CI 1.39-9.00]) or postmigration antenatal care (aOR 3.07 [95% CI 1.55-6.07]) were more likely to have tested for HIV as were heterosexual men who had access to primary care (aOR 3.13 [95% CI 1.58-6.13]) or reported "Good" health status (aOR 2.94 [95% CI 1.41-5.88]). CONCLUSIONS: Access to primary care is limited by structural determinants such as immigration and health care policy, which varies across Europe. For those migrants who can access primary care and other health services, missed opportunities for HIV testing remain a barrier to earlier testing and diagnosis for migrants in Europe. Clinicians should be aware of these potential structural barriers to HIV testing as well as low perception of HIV risk in migrant groups.

Usage of purchased self-tests for HIV and sexually transmitted infections in Amsterdam, the Netherlands: results of population-based and serial cross-sectional studies among the general population and sexual risk groups.

OBJECTIVES: There are limited data on the usage of commercially bought self-tests for HIV and other sexually transmitted infections (STIs). Therefore, we studied HIV/STI self-test usage and its determinants among the general population and sexual risk groups between 2007 and 2015 in Amsterdam, the Netherlands. SETTING: Data were collected in four different studies among the general population (S1-2) and sexual risk groups (S3-4). PARTICIPANTS: S1-Amsterdam residents participating in representative population-based surveys (2008 and 2012; n=6044) drawn from the municipality register; S2-Participants of a population-based study stratified by ethnicity drawn from the municipality register of Amsterdam (2011-2015; n=17 603); S3-Men having sex with men (MSM) participating in an HIV observational cohort study (2008 and 2013; n=597) and S4-STI clinic clients participating in a cross-sectional survey (2007-2012; n=5655). PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Prevalence of HIV/STI self-test usage and its determinants. RESULTS: The prevalence of HIV/STI self-test usage in the preceding 6-12 months varied between 1% and 2% across studies. Chlamydia self-tests were most commonly used, except among MSM in S3. Chlamydia and syphilis self-test usage increased over time among the representative sample of Amsterdam residents (S1) and chlamydia self-test usage increased over time among STI clinic clients (S4). Self-test usage was associated with African Surinamese or Ghanaian ethnic origin (S2), being woman or MSM (S1 and 4) and having had a higher number of sexual partners (S1-2). Among those in the general population who tested for HIV/STI in the preceding 12 months, 5-9% used a self-test. CONCLUSIONS: Despite low HIV/STI self-test usage, we observed increases over time in chlamydia and syphilis self-test usage. Furthermore, self-test usage was higher among high-risk individuals in the general population. It is important to continue monitoring self-test usage and informing the public about the unknown quality of available self-tests in the Netherlands and about the pros and cons of self-testing.

Motives of Dutch men who have sex with men for daily and intermittent HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis usage and preferences for implementation: A qualitative study.

Although PrEP is not yet registered in Europe, including the Netherlands, its approval and implementation are expected in the near future. To inform future pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) implementation, this study aimed to gain insight into motives and preferences for daily or intermittent PrEP use among Dutch HIV-negative men having sex with men (MSM).Between February and December 2013, semistructured interviews were conducted until data saturation was reached (N = 20). Interviews were analyzed using the Grounded Theory approach.Motives for (not) using daily PrEP were based on beliefs about PrEP efficacy and side effects, preferences for other prevention strategies, self-perceived HIV risk, self-perceived efficacy of PrEP adherence, beliefs about possible benefits (e.g., anxiety reduction, sex life improvement), and barriers of PrEP use (e.g., costs, monitoring procedures). The perceived benefits of intermittent versus daily PrEP use were the lower costs and side effects and the lower threshold to decision to start using intermittent PrEP. Barriers of intermittent PrEP versus daily PrEP use were the perceived need to plan their sex life and adhere to multiple prevention strategies. Although some perceived PrEP as a condom substitute, others were likely to combine PrEP and condoms for sexually transmitted infections (STI) prevention and increased HIV protection. Participants preferred PrEP service locations to have specialized knowledge of HIV, antiretroviral therapy, sexual behavior, STIs, patients' medical background, be easily approachable, be able to perform PrEP follow-up monitoring, and provide support.To maximize the public health impact of PrEP, ensuring high uptake among MSM at highest risk is important. Therefore, targeted information about PrEP efficacy and side effects need to be developed, barriers for accessing PrEP services should be minimized, and perceived self-efficacy to use PrEP should be addressed and improved. To prevent increases in STIs, condom use should be monitored and PrEP should be integrated into routine STI screening and counseling.

What do Dutch MSM think of preexposure prophylaxis to prevent HIV-infection? A cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVES: Although preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is not registered in Europe, including the Netherlands, its approval and implementation are expected in the near future. We aimed to gain insight into PrEP awareness and the intention to use PrEP among MSM. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study among 448 HIV-negative participants of the Amsterdam Cohort Study who completed a questionnaire concerning behavior and PrEP between 2012 and 2013. METHODS: Characteristics, PrEP awareness, and intention to use PrEP were described and multinomial logistic regression was used to identify determinants of a medium and high intention to use PrEP. RESULTS: PrEP awareness was 54%, but only 13% reported a high intention to use PrEP. High-risk MSM were more likely to have a medium [adjusted odds ratio (aOR): 1.78 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.07-2.97)] or high [aOR: 3.92 (95% CI 1.68-9.15)] intention to use PrEP than low-risk MSM, as were MSM with higher perceptions of self-efficacy to use PrEP [high intention: aOR: 6.15 (95% CI 2.50-15.09)] and higher perceptions of relief due to PrEP [medium intention: aOR: 2.67 (95% CI 1.32-5.40); high intention: aOR: 14.87 (95% CI 5.98-37.01)] than MSM with lower perceptions. MSM with higher perceptions of shame about using PrEP [medium intention: aOR: 0.35 (95% CI 0.19-0.62); high intention: aOR: 0.22 (95% CI 0.07-0.71)] or with more worries about side-effects were less likely to have a high [aOR: 0.18 (95% CI 0.06-0.54)] or medium [aOR: 0.29 (95% CI 0.12-0.72)] intention to use PrEP. CONCLUSION: The overall intention to use PrEP was relatively low, but higher among high-risk MSM. If PrEP implementation among high-risk MSM in the Netherlands becomes reality, PrEP awareness should be increased and psychosocial determinants that will influence uptake should be addressed.