Purpose HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is highly effective in preventing HIV transmission. Finding a PrEP provider, however, can be a barrier to accessing care. This study explores the distribution of publicly listed PrEP-providing clinics in the United States. Methods Data regarding 2,094 PrEP-providing clinics come from PrEP Locator, a national database of PrEP-providing clinics. We compared the distribution of these PrEP clinics to the distribution of new HIV diagnoses within various geographical areas and by key populations. Results Most (43/50) states had <1 PrEP-providing clinic per 100,000 population. Among states, the median was two clinics per 1,000 PrEP-eligible MSM. Differences between disease burden and service provision were seen for counties with higher proportions of their residents living in poverty, lacking health insurance, identifying as African American, or identifying as Hispanic/Latino. The Southern region accounted for over half of all new HIV diagnoses, but only one-quarter of PrEP-providing clinics. Conclusions The current number of PrEP-providing clinics is not sufficient to meet needs. Additionally, PrEP-providing clinics are unevenly distributed compared to disease burden, with poor coverage in the Southern divisions and areas with higher poverty, uninsured, and larger minority populations. PrEP services should be expanded and targeted to address disparities.

Objectives. To explore US geographic areas with limited access to HIV preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) providers, PrEP deserts. Methods. We sourced publicly listed PrEP providers from a national database of PrEP providers from 2017 and obtained county-level urbanicity classification and population estimates of men who have sex with men (MSM) from public data. We calculated travel time from census tract to the nearest provider. We classified a census tract as a PrEP desert if 1-way driving time was greater than 30 or 60 minutes. Results. One in 8 PrEP-eligible MSM (108 758/844 574; 13%) lived in 30-minute-drive deserts, and a sizable minority lived in 60-minute-drive deserts (38 804/844 574; 5%). Location in the South and lower urbanicity were strongly associated with increased odds of PrEP desert status. Conclusions. A substantial number of persons at high risk for HIV transmission live in locations with no nearby PrEP provider. Rural and Southern areas are disproportionately affected. Public Health Implications. For maximum implementation effectiveness of PrEP, geography should not determine access. Programs to train clinicians, expand venues for PrEP care, and provide telemedicine services are needed.

Introduction Electronic and other new media technologies (eHealth) can facilitate large‐scale dissemination of information and effective delivery of interventions for HIV care and prevention. There is a need to both monitor a rapidly changing pipeline of technology‐based care and prevention methods and to assess whether the interventions are appropriately diversified. We systematically review and critically appraise the research pipeline of eHealth interventions for HIV care and prevention, including published studies and other funded projects. Methods Two peer‐reviewed literature databases were searched for studies describing the development, trial testing or implementation of new technology interventions, published from September 2014 to September 2018. The National Institutes of Health database of grants was searched for interventions still in development. Interventions were included if eHealth was utilized and an outcome directly related to HIV treatment or prevention was targeted. We summarized each intervention including the stage of development, eHealth mode of delivery, target population and stage of the HIV care and prevention continua targeted. Results and discussion Of 2178 articles in the published literature, 113 were included with 84 unique interventions described. The interventions utilize a variety of eHealth technologies and target various points on the prevention and care continua, with greater emphasis on education, behaviour change and testing than linkage to medical care. There were a variety of interventions for HIV care support but none for PrEP care. Most interventions were developed for populations in high income countries. An additional 62 interventions with funding were found in the development pipeline, with greater emphasis on managing HIV and PrEP care. Conclusions Our systematic review found a robust collection of eHealth interventions in the published literature as well as unpublished interventions still in development. In the published literature, there is an imbalance of interventions favouring education and behaviour change over linkage to care, retention in care, and adherence, especially for PrEP. The next generation of interventions already in the pipeline might address these neglected areas of care and prevention, but the development process is slow. Researchers need new methods for more efficient and expedited intervention development so that current and future needs are addressed.

Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a prevalent and pressing public health concern that affects people of all gender and sexual identities. Though studies have identified that male couples may experience IPV at rates as high as or higher than women in heterosexual partnerships, the body of literature addressing this population is still nascent. This study recruited 160 male–male couples in Atlanta, Boston, and Chicago to independently complete individual surveys measuring demographic information, partner violence experience and perpetration, and individual and relationship characteristics that may shape the experience of violence. Forty-six percent of respondents reported experiencing IPV in the past year. Internalized homophobia significantly increased the risk for reporting experiencing, perpetrating, or both for any type of IPV. This study is the first to independently gather data on IPV from both members of male dyads and indicates an association between internalized homophobia and risk for IPV among male couples. The results highlight the unique experiences of IPV in male–male couples and call for further research and programmatic attention to address the exorbitant levels of IPV experienced within some of these partnerships.

BackgroundAn estimated one- to-two-thirds of new human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infections among US men who have sex with men (MSM) occur within the context of primary partnerships. Despite this fact, there remains a lack of prevention interventions that focus on male sero-discordant dyads. Interventions that provide male couples with skills to manage HIV risk, and to support each other towards active engagement in HIV prevention and care, are urgently needed.ObjectiveThe objective of this paper is to describe the protocol for an innovative dyadic intervention (Stronger Together) that combines couples’ HIV testing and dyadic adherence counseling to improve treatment adherence and engagement in care among HIV sero-discordant male couples in the United States.MethodsThe research activities involve a prospective randomized controlled trial (RCT) of approximately 165 venue- and clinic-recruited sero-discordant male couples (330 individuals: 165 HIV sero-negative and 165 HIV sero-positive). Couples randomized into the intervention arm receive couples’ HIV counseling and testing plus dyadic adherence counseling, while those randomized to the control arm receive individual HIV counseling and testing. The study takes place in three cities: Atlanta, GA (study site Emory University); Boston, MA (study site The Fenway Institute); and Chicago, IL (study site Ann & Robert H. Lurie Children’s Hospital of Chicago). Cohort recruitment began in 2015. Couples are followed prospectively for 24 months, with study assessments at baseline, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months.ResultsStronger Together was launched in August 2014. To date, 160 couples (97% of the target enrollment) have been enrolled and randomized. The average retention rate across the three sites is 95%. Relationship dissolution has been relatively low, with only 13 couples breaking up during the RCT. Of the 13 couples who have broken up, 10 of the 13 HIV-positive partners have been retained in the cohort; none of these HIV-positive partners have enrolled new partners into the RCT.ConclusionsThe intervention offers a unique opportunity for sero-discordant couples to support each other towards common HIV management goals by facilitating their development of tailored prevention plans via couples-based HIV testing and counseling, as well as problem-solving skills in Partner Strategies to Enhance Problem-solving Skills (STEPS).Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT01772992; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01772992 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6szFBVk1R)