The Context of Sexual Risk Behaviour Among Men Who Have Sex with Men Seeking PrEP, and the Impact of PrEP on Sexual Behaviour.

There are still important gaps in our understanding of how people will incorporate PrEP into their existing HIV prevention strategies. In this paper, we explore how PrEP use impacted existing sexual risk behaviours and risk reduction strategies using qualitative data from the PROUD study. From February 2014 to January 2016, we conducted 41 in-depth interviews with gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men (GBMSM) enrolled in the PROUD PrEP study at sexual health clinics in England. The interviews were conducted in English and were audio-recorded. The recordings were transcribed, coded and analysed using framework analysis. In the interviews, we explored participants' sexual behaviour before joining the study and among those using or who had used PrEP, changes to sexual behaviour after starting PrEP. Participants described the risk behaviour and management strategies before using PrEP, which included irregular condom use, sero-sorting, and strategic positioning. Participants described their sexual risk taking before initiating PrEP in the context of the sexualised use of drugs, geographical spaces linked with higher risk sexual norms, and digitised sexual networking, as well as problematic psychological factors that exacerbated risk taking. The findings highlight that in the main, individuals who were already having frequent condomless sex, added PrEP to the existing range of risk management strategies, influencing the boundaries of the 'rules' for some but not all. While approximately half the participants reduced other risk reduction strategies after starting PrEP, the other half did not alter their behaviours. PrEP provided an additional HIV prevention option to a cohort of GBMSM at high risk of HIV due to inconsistent use of other prevention options. In summary, PrEP provides a critical and necessary additional HIV prevention option that individuals can add to existing strategies in order to enhance protection, at least from HIV. As a daily pill, PrEP offers protection in the context of the sex cultures associated with sexualised drug use, digitised sexual applications and shifting social norms around sexual fulfilment and risk taking. PrEP can offer short or longer-term options for individuals as their sexual desires change over their life course offering protection from HIV during periods of heightened risk. PrEP should not be perceived or positioned in opposition to the existing HIV prevention toolkit, but rather as additive and as a tool that can and is having a substantial impact on HIV.

A workforce in jeopardy: identifying the challenges of ensuring a sustainable advanced HIV nursing workforce.

BACKGROUND: HIV services in England face substantial challenges arising from financial pressures and changes to commissioning. A sustainable HIV specialist nursing workforce will be vital to enable them to respond to those challenges. AIMS: This paper examines the current workforce situation in HIV services across the country. METHODS: This mixed-method study involved semi-structured interviews with 19 key stakeholders and with 44 nurses/physicians from 21 purposively selected HIV services across England. Data were interpreted using a framework analysis approach. RESULTS: 'Building a career in HIV nursing' identified problems associated with retention and recruitment. Changes in commissioning are disrupting common career routes from sexual health to HIV nursing, and a perceived lack of a clear career pathway was seen as a barrier to recruitment. 'Developing a specialist workforce' explored the professional development of the current workforce, which was hampered by poor access to funding or study time for advanced study and the absence of an HIV-specific advanced nursing qualification. CONCLUSIONS: The HIV nursing workforce, which provides an increasing proportion of HIV care, is facing serious recruitment and retention challenges. A strategic approach to workforce development and training is essential to overcome systemic barriers and secure the next generation of skilled practitioners.

Acceptability of an open-label wait-listed trial design: Experiences from the PROUD PrEP study.

BACKGROUND: PROUD participants were randomly assigned to receive pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) immediately or after a deferred period of one-year. We report on the acceptability of this open-label wait-listed trial design. METHODS: Participants completed an acceptability questionnaire, which included categorical study acceptability data and free-text data on most and least liked aspects of the study. We also conducted in-depth interviews (IDI) with a purposely selected sub-sample of participants. RESULTS: Acceptability questionnaires were completed by 76% (415/544) of participants. After controlling for age, immediate-group participants were almost twice as likely as deferred-group participants to complete the questionnaire (AOR:1.86;95%CI:1.24,2.81). In quantitative data, the majority of participants in both groups found the wait-listed design acceptable when measured by satisfaction of joining the study, intention to remain in the study, and interest in joining a subsequent study. However, three-quarters thought that the chance of being in the deferred-group might put other volunteers off joining the study. In free-text responses, data collection tools were the most frequently reported least liked aspect of the study. A fifth of deferred participants reported 'being deferred' as the thing they least liked about the study. However, more deferred participants disliked the data collection tools than the fact that they had to wait a year to access PrEP. Participants in the IDIs had a good understanding of the rationale for the open-label wait-listed study design. Most accepted the design but acknowledged they were, or would have been, disappointed to be randomised to the deferred group. Five of the 25 participants interviewed reported some objection to the wait-listed design. CONCLUSION: The quantitative and qualitative findings suggest that in an environment where PrEP was not available, the rationale for the wait-listed trial design was well understood and generally acceptable to most participants in this study.

How does specialist nursing contribute to HIV service delivery across England?

This study aimed to examine what specialist nursing contributes to HIV service delivery across England and how it could be optimised. A three part multi-method qualitative study was undertaken, involving (1) interviews with 19 stakeholders representing professional or service user groups; (2) interviews with nurse/physician pairs from 21 HIV services; and (3) case studies involving site visits to five services. A framework analysis approach was used to manage and analyse the data. There was substantial variability in specialist nursing roles and the extent of role development. Most hospital-based HIV nurses (13/19) were running nurse-led clinics, primarily for stable patients with almost half (6/13) also managing more complex patients. Role development was supported by non-medical prescribing, a robust governance framework and appropriate workload allocation. The availability and organisation of community HIV nursing provision determined how services supported vulnerable patients to keep them engaged in care. Four service models were identified. The study showed that there is scope for providing a greater proportion of routine care through nurse-led clinics. HIV community nursing can influence health outcomes for vulnerable patients, but provision is variable. With limited financial resources, services may need to decide how to deploy their specialist nurses for best effect.

An effective strategy to diagnose HIV infection: findings from a national audit of HIV partner notification outcomes in sexual health and infectious disease clinics in the UK.

OBJECTIVES: Partner notification (PN) is a key public health intervention in the control of STIs. Data regarding its clinical effectiveness in the context of HIV are lacking. We sought to audit HIV PN outcomes across the UK. METHODS: All UK sexual health and HIV services were invited to participate. Clinical audit consisted of retrospective case-note review for up to 40 individuals diagnosed with HIV per site during 2011 (index cases) and a review of PN outcomes for up to five contacts elicited by PN per index case. RESULTS: 169/221 (76%) clinical services participated (93% sexual health/HIV services, 7% infectious diseases/HIV units). Most (97%) delivered PN for HIV. Data were received regarding 2964 index cases (67% male; 50% heterosexual, 52% white). PN was attempted for 88% of index cases, and outcomes for 3211 contacts were audited (from an estimated total of 6400): 519 (16%) were found not to be at risk of undiagnosed HIV infection, 1399 (44%) were informed of their risk and had an HIV test, 310 (10%) were informed of the risk but not known to have tested and 983 (30%) were not informed of their risk of HIV infection. Of 1399 contacts tested through PN, 293 (21%) were newly diagnosed with HIV infection. Regular partners were most likely to test positive (p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: HIV PN is a highly effective diagnostic strategy. Non-completion of PN thus represents a missed opportunity to diagnose HIV in at-risk populations. Vigorous efforts should be made to pursue PN to identify people living with, and at risk of, HIV infection.

Partner notification.

Partner notification is an essential part of case management for sexually transmitted infections. Done correctly it reduces persistent or recurrent infection in the index patient, identifies previously undiagnosed infections, and may thus contribute to reduced transmission in the population. The effectiveness of patient referral of partners can be enhanced through the provision of written information and easy access to tests and medication. A recent systematic review of partner notification found that enhanced partner therapy (helping get treatment to partners more rapidly) reduced re-infection in the index case by almost 30% compared with simple patient referral. Provider referral, where the healthcare worker contacts partners directly, can also be effective, and provides an important service for patients who are wary of informing partners themselves. Partner notification services should be available for all patients found to have a sexually transmitted infection, whether the diagnosis is made in specialist settings, or in primary or community-based care. For patients with HIV, partner notification should be addressed when the infection is first diagnosed and revisited for subsequent partners. Access to specialist partner notification services is an important part of any sexual healthcare system. The professional competencies required to undertake partner notification have now been clearly defined.

Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of traditional and new partner notification technologies for curable sexually transmitted infections: observational study, systematic reviews and mathematical modelling.

BACKGROUND: Partner notification is essential to the comprehensive case management of sexually transmitted infections. Systematic reviews and mathematical modelling can be used to synthesise information about the effects of new interventions to enhance the outcomes of partner notification. OBJECTIVE: To study the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of traditional and new partner notification technologies for curable sexually transmitted infections (STIs). DESIGN: Secondary data analysis of clinical audit data; systematic reviews of randomised controlled trials (MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) published from 1 January 1966 to 31 August 2012 and of studies of health-related quality of life (HRQL) [MEDLINE, EMBASE, ISI Web of Knowledge, NHS Economic Evaluation Database (NHS EED), Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE) and Health Technology Assessment (HTA)] published from 1 January 1980 to 31 December 2011; static models of clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness; and dynamic modelling studies to improve parameter estimation and examine effectiveness. SETTING: General population and genitourinary medicine clinic attenders. PARTICIPANTS: Heterosexual women and men. INTERVENTIONS: Traditional partner notification by patient or provider referral, and new partner notification by expedited partner therapy (EPT) or its UK equivalent, accelerated partner therapy (APT). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Population prevalence; index case reinfection; and partners treated per index case. RESULTS: Enhanced partner therapy reduced reinfection in index cases with curable STIs more than simple patient referral [risk ratio (RR) 0.71; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.56 to 0.89]. There are no randomised trials of APT. The median number of partners treated for chlamydia per index case in UK clinics was 0.60. The number of partners needed to treat to interrupt transmission of chlamydia was lower for casual than for regular partners. In dynamic model simulations, >10% of partners are chlamydia positive with look-back periods of up to 18 months. In the presence of a chlamydia screening programme that reduces population prevalence, treatment of current partners achieves most of the additional reduction in prevalence attributable to partner notification. Dynamic model simulations show that cotesting and treatment for chlamydia and gonorrhoea reduce the prevalence of both STIs. APT has a limited additional effect on prevalence but reduces the rate of index case reinfection. Published quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) weights were of insufficient quality to be used in a cost-effectiveness study of partner notification in this project. Using an intermediate outcome of cost per infection diagnosed, doubling the efficacy of partner notification from 0.4 to 0.8 partners treated per index case was more cost-effective than increasing chlamydia screening coverage. CONCLUSIONS: There is evidence to support the improved clinical effectiveness of EPT in reducing index case reinfection. In a general heterosexual population, partner notification identifies new infected cases but the impact on chlamydia prevalence is limited. Partner notification to notify casual partners might have a greater impact than for regular partners in genitourinary clinic populations. Recommendations for future research are (1) to conduct randomised controlled trials using biological outcomes of the effectiveness of APT and of methods to increase testing for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and STIs after APT; (2) collection of HRQL data should be a priority to determine QALYs associated with the sequelae of curable STIs; and (3) standardised parameter sets for curable STIs should be developed for mathematical models of STI transmission that are used for policy-making. FUNDING: The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Repeat infection with gonorrhoea in Sheffield, UK: predictable and preventable?

BACKGROUND: Repeat infection with gonorrhoea may contribute significantly to infection persistence and health service workload. The authors investigated whether repeat infection is associated with particular subgroups who may benefit from tailored interventions. METHODS: Data on gonorrhoea diagnoses between 2004 and 2008 were obtained from Sheffield sexually transmitted infection clinic. Kaplan-Meier survival curves were used to estimate the percentage of patients with repeat diagnoses within a year, and a Cox proportional hazard model was used to investigate associated risk factors. RESULTS: Of 1650 patients diagnosed with gonorrhoea, 7.7% (95% CI 6.5% to 9.1%) had a repeat diagnosis within 1 year. Men who have sex with men under 30, teenage heterosexuals, black Caribbeans, people living in deprived areas and those diagnosed in 2004 were most likely to re-present. Of those patients (53%) providing additional behavioural data, repeat diagnosis was more common in those reporting prior history of gonorrhoea, any previous sexually transmitted infection diagnoses, two or more partners in the past 3 months and a high-risk partner in the past year. In an adjusted analysis, repeat diagnosis was independently associated with being a young man who has sex with men, living in a deprived area, a history of gonorrhoea and being diagnosed in 2004 but was most strongly associated with non-completion of behavioural data forms. CONCLUSIONS: Groups most at risk of repeat infection with gonorrhoea are highly predictable but are disinclined to provide detailed information on their sexual behaviour. Care pathways including targeted and intensive one-to-one risk reduction counselling, effective partner notification and offers of re-testing could deliver considerable public health benefit.

Costs and cost effectiveness of different strategies for chlamydia screening and partner notification: an economic and mathematical modelling study.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the cost, cost effectiveness, and sex equity of different intervention strategies within the English National Chlamydia Screening Programme. To develop a tool for calculating cost effectiveness of chlamydia control programmes at a local, national, or international level. DESIGN: An economic and mathematical modelling study with cost effectiveness analysis. Costs were restricted to those of screening and partner notification from the perspective of the NHS and excluded patient costs, the costs of reinfection, and costs of complications arising from initial infection. SETTING: England. Population Individuals eligible for the National Chlamydia Screening Programme. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Cost effectiveness of National Chlamydia Screening Programme in 2008-9 (as cost per individual tested, cost per positive diagnosis, total cost of screening, number screened, number infected, sex ratio of those tested and treated). Comparison of baseline programme with two different interventions-(i) increased coverage of primary screening in men and (ii) increased efficacy of partner notification. RESULTS: In 2008-9 screening was estimated to cost about £46.3m in total and £506 per infection treated. Provision for partner notification within the screening programme cost between £9 and £27 per index case, excluding treatment and testing. The model results suggest that increasing male screening coverage from 8% (baseline value) to 24% (to match female coverage) would cost an extra £22.9m and increase the cost per infection treated to £528. In contrast, increasing partner notification efficacy from 0.4 (baseline value) to 0.8 partners per index case would cost an extra £3.3m and would reduce the cost per infection diagnosed to £449. Increasing screening coverage to 24% in men would cost over six times as much as increasing partner notification to 0.8 but only treat twice as many additional infections. CONCLUSIONS: In the English National Chlamydia Screening Programme increasing the effectiveness of partner notification is likely to cost less than increasing male coverage but also improve the ratio of women to men diagnosed. Further evaluation of the cost effectiveness of partner notification and screening is urgently needed. The spreadsheet tool developed in this study can be easily modified for use in other settings to evaluate chlamydia control programmes.

Can the male-to-female ratio of gonorrhoea in one sexually transmissible infection treatment facility be solely used to judge its efficiency?

BACKGROUND: This facility has for a long time audited its efficacy in contact tracing (case finding) and found results comparable with national guidelines. In addition, we consistently measure control of the disease using three indices. A departure from the norm in one of these (the male-to-female ratio) prompted us to explore whether local case finding, and therefore control, was lacking resulting in the identification of a statistical anomaly. We have learnt a lesson, which may be of use to others who critically evaluate their work. METHODS: Review of statutory clinic quarterly returns and manually-held contact tracer data, comparison of representative quarters (Wilcoxson sign rank test) and detailed inspection of sampled case-to-case contact tracing efficiency. RESULTS: Evidence was found challenging our belief that male-to-female ratios are at face value an inevitably accurate surrogate for case finding or infection control. In our clinic, we identified recording anomalies giving rise to false concerns that case finding was less efficient than usual. CONCLUSIONS: Although the heterosexual male:female ratio for gonorrhoea is one readily available and proxy measure of disease control and tracing efficiency, its sole use should be interpreted with caution. A time lag across quarters between patient and partner attendance and other recording anomalies may mislead. Ratios should therefore be interpreted in the context of partner notification outcomes, which give a more reliable measure of efficiency. The use of the ratio in critical evaluation of a unit's efficiency should be but one part of a package of measures.

Concordance between Neisseria gonorrhoeae genotypes recovered from known sexual contacts.

Neisseria gonorrhoeae multiantigen sequence typing (NG-MAST) is a highly discriminatory molecular typing procedure that provides precise and unambiguous strain characterization. Since molecular typing can complement contact tracing for reconstructing gonorrhea sexual networks, the concordance between the NG-MAST genotypes of pairs of N. gonorrhoeae isolates from recent sexual contacts was examined. Among 72 pairs of gonococci from recent sexual contacts, the genotypes of each pair were concordant in 65 cases (90.3%). In two further pairs, the isolates from sexual contacts differed by only a single nonsynonymous substitution in the porin gene, and in both of these pairs, the isolates were the same by opa typing. The other five nonconcordant pairs of isolates were clearly different strains. opa typing data were available for 51 of the pairs of isolates from sexual contacts, and concordant opa types were obtained in 38 cases (74.5%). NG-MAST should therefore be better than opa typing at identifying recent sexual contacts and has the important advantage over opa typing of being a more precise method of strain characterization.

The characterisation of a recent syphilis outbreak in Sheffield, UK, and an evaluation of contact tracing as a method of control.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the factors around and the success of contact-tracing in a recent major outbreak of infectious syphilis in Sheffield, and to evaluate the effectiveness of it, our hitherto standard strategy of control. METHOD: Retrospective chart review RESULTS: Over a period of 18 months, an outbreak of 21 cases was, on closer inspection, the result of several, discrete "micro" outbreaks in different groups. Two major patterns emerged, a relatively straightforward and more accessible cluster in heterosexual persons (a "spread" network), and more sporadic, "starburst" networks in men who have sex with men. CONCLUSION: Our traditional method of control, contact-tracing, was seen to be most effective in the spread network in heterosexuals. In the face of an apparent outbreak, clinicians should explore the nature and parameters of their local epidemic and engage a mixture of control methods. These may include, but not excusively so, contact-tracing to interrupt transmission by case-finding and by treatment.