Exploring Factors Affecting Patient-Provider Interactions and Healthcare Engagement Among a Diverse Sample of Women Who Have Sex with Women in New York City.

Women who have sex with women (WSW) have lower rates of engagement in health care and preventive screenings than women who have sex exclusively with men. Existing literature provides limited insight into how intersecting and overlapping identities, such as race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender identity, and identities related to gender expression, may shape individuals' experiences within health care. We conducted qualitative interviews in New York City with 30 people who identified as women, reported sex with people who identify as women, were age 18-65, and were diverse in race, ethnicity, and sexual orientation and gender identity. The semi-structured questionnaire asked participants about positive and negative healthcare experiences to elicit what could encourage or prevent seeking care, with a focus on provider-related factors. Factors that led to positive healthcare experiences included having a provider who was knowledgeable about LGBTQ experience and health and who affirmed their sexuality, gender identity, and other intersecting identities. Factors that contributed to negative healthcare experiences included poor interactions with providers, and providers' perceived heteronormativity and lack of awareness of WSW healthcare needs. WSW of different races, ethnicities, sexual orientations, and gender identities seek validating healthcare experiences that acknowledge and affirm their identities. We present a visual summary of the main thematic factors that contributed to positive and negative WSW healthcare experiences. Increasing access to care requires training providers on how to engage WSW patients, including WSW of diverse race/ethnicity and gender identity and expression.

How Can I Get COVID?: Understanding Differences in American Heterosexual and Sexual Minority Men's Risk Perception.

Men are more vulnerable to COVID-19 infections compared to women, but their risk perceptions around COVID-19 are persistently lower. Further, men often engage in less health promotion behavior because self-care in this capacity is seen as weak or less masculine. This combination has consequences for mortality; thus, a better understanding of men's COVID-19 cognitions and individual difference factors is critical. In a web-based survey conducted during the beginning stages of the pandemic in the U.S., we collected risk perceptions of various sexual and non-sexual behaviors from heterosexual (n = 137) and gay/bisexual men (n = 108). There were no significant sexual orientation differences for perceptions of COVID-19 risk from routine activities or in overall risk estimates. However, gay/bisexual men did report engaging in more precautionary behavior while socializing (i.e., masking, social distancing) and reported higher risk perceptions than did heterosexual men for nearly all intimate and sexual activities. A more nuanced understanding of cognitions around COVID-19 is needed to better understand motivation for-and especially motivation against-pursuing vaccinations and continuing precautionary behavior.

Changes in Utilization of Birth Control and PrEP During COVID-19 in the USA: A Mixed-Method Analysis.

In the USA, the COVID-19 pandemic has created challenges beyond the direct consequences of the infection. Because of shifting resources in response to need, many domains within the healthcare sector unrelated to COVID-19 have had interrupted abilities to provide care. In the current study, we focus on preventative sexual health care during the pandemic. In a sample of 511 (mean age = 27.7) people, we examined quantitative data regarding continuation and discontinuation of birth control and PrEP during the pandemic, along with qualitative data illustrating the underlying reasons for participants' (dis)continuation. Results showed that most (92.5%) of birth control users reported continuation of their birth control, with the predominant reasons reported being use for health reasons, long-acting reversible contraceptive use, access to remote healthcare services, and increased vigilance over pregnancy prevention. Conversely, around half (52.6%) of PrEP-using participants reported already discontinuing or planning to discontinue their PrEP regimen. Temporary abstinence and concerns about accessing in-person health care were the predominant reasons for PrEP discontinuation. These results have implications for both researchers and sexual healthcare providers. Disruptions to preventative sexual health care should be considered in ongoing research about patient needs, and healthcare providers may wish to consider particular challenges faced by PrEP users concerning re-start and continuation.

Medical avoidance among marginalized groups: the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Medical avoidance is common among U.S. adults, and may be emphasized among members of marginalized communities due to discrimination concerns. In the current study, we investigated whether this disparity in avoidance was maintained or exacerbated during the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. We assessed the likelihood of avoiding medical care due to general-, discrimination-, and COVID-19-related concerns in an online sample (N = 471). As hypothesized, marginalized groups (i.e., non-White race, Latinx/e ethnicity, non-heterosexual sexual orientation, high BMI) endorsed more general- and discrimination-related medical avoidance than majoritized groups. However, marginalized groups were equally likely to seek COVID-19 treatment as majoritized groups. Implications for reducing medical avoidance among marginalized groups are discussed.

Predictors of PrEP Uptake Among Patients with Equivalent Access.

Increasing PrEP adoption for eligible individuals is critical, but limited research has examined individual-level factors that might be amenable to educational or behavioral intervention. Using data from a PrEP demonstration project conducted at a community health center, we examined differences in behavioral and psychosocial factors between patients offered PrEP who chose to accept it and those who declined. In a multivariable model, the odds of accepting PrEP were higher among those with an HIV-positive main partner, greater risk behavior in the past 3 months, and higher HIV risk perception. PrEP adoption was positively associated with PrEP adherence self-efficacy and negatively associated with perceived sensitivity to medicines. These psychological variables were associated with measures of PrEP- and HIV-related stigma. In the multivariable model, there were no differences in PrEP adoption by demographic factors or socioeconomic status. Data suggest that patients' decisions about PrEP uptake may be impacted not only by objective and subjective HIV risk, but also by psychological variables such as stigma beliefs, medication beliefs, and self-efficacy.

Recognizing and disrupting stigma in implementation of HIV prevention and care: a call to research and action.

INTRODUCTION: There is robust evidence that stigma negatively impacts both people living with HIV and those who might benefit from HIV prevention interventions. Within healthcare settings, research on HIV stigma has focused on intra-personal processes (i.e. knowledge or internalization of community-level stigma that might limit clients' engagement in care) or inter-personal processes (i.e. stigmatized interactions with service providers). Intersectional approaches to stigma call us to examine the ways that intersecting systems of power and oppression produce stigma not only at the individual and interpersonal levels, but also within healthcare service delivery systems. This commentary argues for the importance of analysing and disrupting the way in which stigma may be (intentionally or unintentionally) enacted and sustained within HIV service implementation, that is the policies, protocols and strategies used to deliver HIV prevention and care. We contend that as HIV researchers and practitioners, we have failed to fully specify or examine the mechanisms through which HIV service implementation itself may reinforce stigma and perpetuate inequity. DISCUSSION: We apply Link and Phelan's five stigma components (labelling, stereotyping, separation, status loss and discrimination) as a framework for analysing the way in which stigma manifests in existing service implementation and for evaluating new HIV implementation strategies. We present three examples of common HIV service implementation strategies and consider their potential to activate stigma components, with particular attention to how our understanding of these dynamics can be enhanced and expanded by the application of intersectional perspectives. We then provide a set of sample questions that can be used to develop and test novel implementation strategies designed to mitigate against HIV-specific and intersectional stigma. CONCLUSIONS: This commentary is a theory-informed call to action for the assessment of existing HIV service implementation, for the development of new stigma-reducing implementation strategies and for the explicit inclusion of stigma reduction as a core outcome in implementation research and evaluation. We argue that these strategies have the potential to make critical contributions to our ability to address many system-level form stigmas that undermine health and wellbeing for people living with HIV and those in need of HIV prevention services.

High Rates of PrEP Eligibility but Low Rates of PrEP Access Among a National Sample of Transmasculine Individuals.

BACKGROUND: Transmasculine individuals have been largely ignored in HIV prevention research, and there is a lack of data regarding this population's eligibility for and utilization of HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP). SETTING: National online survey conducted in the United States. METHODS: Between May and July 2017, we surveyed 1808 transmasculine individuals (aged 18-60 years; 30% people of color and/or Latinx), asking questions about sexual behavior and receipt of sexual health care, including PrEP. We examined the number of individuals who would meet eligibility criteria for PrEP and then used log-linked Poisson regression with robust variance estimation to examine predictors of PrEP eligibility. RESULTS: Almost one-quarter of the sample (n = 439; 24.3%) met one or more criterion for PrEP eligibility. PrEP eligibility did not differ by age, race/ethnicity, education, or binary gender identity. PrEP eligibility was lower among heterosexual-identified and higher income participants, and was higher among participants who were in open relationships and reported substance use. Among PrEP-eligible individuals, 64.9% had received an HIV test in the past year, 33.9% had received PrEP information from a provider, and 10.9% (n = 48) had received a PrEP prescription. PrEP-eligible individuals who had received a PrEP prescription were more likely to have a binary gender identity, identify as gay, and be taking testosterone. CONCLUSIONS: A substantial proportion of transmasculine individuals meet PrEP eligibility criteria, but few are receiving adequate PrEP services. Enhanced efforts should be made by providers, programs, and systems to assess HIV-related risk in transmasculine patients and engage them in comprehensive sexual health care.