Late HIV diagnosis among migrant women living in Europe - a systematic review of barriers to HIV testing.

Objectives: HIV transmission persists in Europe, with migrants accounting for over two-fifths of new diagnoses. Over half of all women in Europe are diagnosed late - particularly migrant women. Therefore, an updated understanding of migrant women's needs is crucial to inform inclusive and relevant HIV research, services, and policies. Methods: A systematic review relating to factors influencing late HIV diagnoses among migrant women living in Europe in 2011-2021 was conducted, based on data from 12 papers relating to 13 European Union (EU) countries and three non-EU countries. Results: The studies revealed a range of individual, sociocultural, and structural barriers to HIV diagnosis. Individual barriers included low perceived risk of HIV, lack of knowledge about HIV symptoms and HIV services, lack of trust in healthcare systems, and fear of societal implications of an HIV diagnosis. Sociocultural barriers included language and communication challenges, stigma, and lack of community testing opportunities. Structural factors included poverty, poor living conditions, unclear legal rights, administrative barriers to healthcare access, and lack of testing opportunities. Conclusions: Barriers varied according to resident country, healthcare system, and country/region of origin. The studies highlighted the importance of inclusive research and service design and development, to address the needs of migrant women and reduce inequalities, especially given the current climate in Europe and the everchanging patterns of migration.

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.

Utilizing community and voluntary sector partnerships to survey and compare the health outcomes of hard-to- reach groups to the wider community-the EURO- URHIS 2 Hard-to-Reach Project.

Background: This article describes the Hard-to-Reach (HtR) Project that was developed to capture health and lifestyle data from groups who are HtR by postal surveys within the larger EURO-URHIS 2 project. By collaborating with partner organizations, data were collected using standard survey tools, allowing for comparison with the wider population. Following a scoping exercise to determine which groups were HtR in Greater Manchester, black and minority ethnic (BME) groups and students were selected. BME groups were surveyed through partnership with Community and Voluntary Sector Organizations (CVSOs). Language barriers were addressed through the recruitment of volunteer interpreters. Students were surveyed by accessing university premises. Fifteen survey visits took place at nine CVSOs and five visits to University facilities. In total, 144 eligible surveys were collected. There were significant differences for both HtR groups, compared with Greater Manchester and the EURO-URHIS 2 mean. Both HtR groups had worse outcomes than both Greater Manchester and EURO-URHIS 2 for psychological problems. In addition, students had worse outcomes for passive smoking, binge drinking, use of cannabis, lack of access to green spaces, less sense of belonging and social cohesion and damp or mildewed homes, and better outcomes for self-perceived health and overweight and obesity. BME had in addition worse outcomes than both Greater Manchester and EURO-URHIS 2 for long-standing restrictive illness. Despite the limitations of this study, the development of this methodology allowed for the collection of comparable data, showing up statistically significant differences between the HtR populations and the wider population which merits further investigation.