The 2019 online pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) user survey in the United Kingdom was conducted to assess HIV PrEP access, and user characteristics. One in five respondents continued experiencing difficulties accessing PrEP; users were almost exclusively gay or bisexual men at high risk of HIV. The majority obtained PrEP through health service clinics and rated PrEP positively. High STI rates were reported among users. Renal and sexual health checks are advised for those sourcing PrEP privately.

BackgroundPre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is a novel HIV prevention method whereby HIV-negative individuals take the drugs tenofovir and emtricitabine to prevent HIV acquisition. Optimal adherence is critical for PrEP efficacy. Chemsex describes sexual activity under the influence of psychoactive drugs, in the UK typically; crystal methamphetamine, gamma-hydroxybutyrate(GHB) and/or mephedrone. Chemsex drug use has been associated with increased HIV transmission risk among gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men (GBM) and poor ART adherence among people living with HIV. This study assessed whether self-reported chemsex events affected self-reported daily PrEP adherence among PROUD study participants.MethodsThe PROUD study was an open-label, randomised controlled trial, conducted in thirteen English sexual health clinics, assessing effectiveness of TruvadaⓇ-PrEP among 544 HIV-negative GBM. The study reported an 86% risk-reduction of HIV from daily PrEP. Participants were asked about chemsex engagement at follow-up visits. Monthly self-reports of missed PrEP tablets were aggregated to assess adherence between visits. Univariable and multivariable regression analyses were performed to test for associations between chemsex and reporting less than seven out of seven intended doses(<7/7ID) in the 7 days before and/or after last condomless anal intercourse(CAI).Results1479 follow-up visit forms and 2260 monthly adherence forms from 388 participants were included in the analyses, with 38.5% visit forms reporting chemsex since last visit and 29.9% follow-up periods reporting <7/7ID. No statistically significant associations were observed between reporting <7/7ID and chemsex (aOR=1.29 [95% CI 0.90–1.87], p = 0.168). Statistically significant associations were seen between reporting <7/7ID and participants perceiving that they would miss PrEP doses during the trial, Asian ethnicity, and reporting unemployment at baseline.ConclusionsThese analyses suggest PrEP remains a feasible and effective HIV prevention method for GBM engaging in chemsex, a practise which is prevalent in this group and has been associated with increased HIV transmission risk.

The extent of and factors associated with self-reported overdose and selfreported receipt of naloxone among people who inject drugs (PWID) in England, Wales and Northern Ireland.http://researchonline.ljmu.ac.uk/6768/ Article LJMU has developed LJMU Research Online for users to access the research output of the University more effectively. Copyright © and Moral Rights for the papers on this site are retained by the individual authors and/or other copyright owners. Users may download and/or print one copy of any article(s) in LJMU Research Online to facilitate their private study or for non-commercial research. You may not engage in further distribution of the material or use it for any profit-making activities or any commercial gain.The version presented here may differ from the published version or from the version of the record. Please see the repository URL above for details on accessing the published version and note that access may require a subscription. LJMU Research OnlineThe extent of and factors associated with self-reported overdose and self-reported receipt of naloxone among people who inject drugs in England, Wales and Northern Ireland AbstractThe extent of and factors associated with self-reported overdose and self-reported receipt of naloxone among people who inject drugs in England, Wales and Northern Ireland

ObjectivesThe use of antibiotics as pre-exposure or postexposure prophylaxis for sexually transmitted infection (STI) prevention (STI prophylaxis) is not currently recommended in the UK, but there is evidence that self-prescribing occurs among those at greatest risk. We present the prevalence and factors associated with STI prophylaxis among a community sample of HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) users.MethodsThe 2019 online PrEP User Survey ran between 17 May and 1 July. Eligible participants included UK residents reporting HIV PrEP use or having tried to obtain HIV PrEP since January 2017. STI prophylaxis use was defined as reporting buying antibiotics to prevent STIs, either privately or through the internet; this question was only asked to HIV PrEP users. Factors associated with STI prophylaxis use were assessed using univariable and multivariable logistic regression.ResultsOverall, 9% (167/1856) of HIV PrEP users reported STI prophylaxis use; 97% were gay or bisexual men, 84% reported white ethnicity, 55% resided in London and 69% were aged ≥35 years. Factors associated with STI prophylaxis included: reporting ≥5 compared with 1–4 condomless sex partners in the past 6 months (12% vs 5.6%, adjusted odds ratio (aOR)=1.80; 95% CI 1.22 to 2.64), reporting chemsex drug use compared with no sexualised drug use in the past 12 months (13% vs 6.0%, aOR=1.88; 95% CI 1.20 to 2.93) and reporting an STI diagnosis in the past 12 months (12% vs 6.6%, aOR=1.54; 95% CI 1.08 to 2.18). Variables not significant in multivariable analyses included: ethnicity, age, residence and HIV PrEP sourcing.ConclusionsApproximately 1 in 10 HIV PrEP users from this community sample reported self-prescribed STI prophylaxis. STI prophylaxis was associated with sexual behaviour known to facilitate STI transmission and with a history of recent STIs acquisition. Given the potential risk of antimicrobial resistance, sexual health clinicians should consider asking attendees, especially HIV PrEP users, about the use of antibiotics as STI prophylaxis, to inform appropriate counselling, testing and management.

AimCognitive impairments negatively impact the everyday functioning of young people with mental illness. However, no previous study has asked young people (1) how much of a priority cognitive functioning is within mental health treatment, and (2) what types of cognition‐focused treatments are most appealing. The current study aimed to address these questions.MethodsYour Mind, Your Choice was a survey‐based study involving an Australian sample of young people who were receiving mental health treatment. The survey asked participants to (1) provide demographic and mental health history, (2) rate the importance of 20 recovery domains, including cognition, when receiving mental health treatment, (3) share their experiences of cognitive functioning, and (4) rate their likelihood of trying 14 different behavioural, biochemical, and physical treatments that may address cognitive functioning.ResultsTwo‐hundred and forty‐three participants (Mage = 20.07, SD = 3.25, range = 15–25, 74% female) completed the survey. Participants reported that addressing cognitive functioning in mental health care was very important (M = 76.33, SD = 20.7, rated on a scale from 0 = not important to 100 = extremely important), ranking cognition among their top six treatment needs. Seventy percent of participants reported experiencing cognitive difficulties, but less than one‐third had received treatment for these difficulties. Compensatory training, sleep interventions and psychoeducation were ranked as treatments that participants were most likely to try to support their cognitive functioning.ConclusionsYoung people with mental ill‐health commonly experience cognitive difficulties and would like this to be a focus of treatment; however, this need is often unmet and should be a focus of research and implementation.

Sustaining the impact of hepatitis B virus (HBV) vaccination on incidence and prevalence of HBV infection requires increasing and maintaining the uptake of vaccine among those at risk. In recent years, the level of vaccine uptake among people who inject drugs (PWID) in the UK has levelled-off. Data (2015–2016) from the national unlinked-anonymous monitoring survey of PWID, an annual survey that collects data from PWID across England, Wales and Northern Ireland, were used to examine HBV vaccine uptake. Data from participants who had injected drugs during the previous year were used to investigate sources of hepatitis B vaccine doses as well as factors associated with vaccine uptake. Among the 3175 anti-HBc-negative participants, 3138 (99%) reported their vaccination status; 23% (714) reported no vaccine uptake. Among those not vaccinated, 447 (63%) reported being sexually active and 116 (16%) reported sharing needles and syringes. Majority of those not vaccinated reported accessing services in the previous year that could have provided hepatitis B vaccine doses. These missed opportunities for vaccinating of PWID indicate a need for additional targeted interventions.

There is a recognised potential risk of transmission of blood-borne viruses (BBVs) from infected healthcare workers to patients during exposure prone procedures (EPPs). The restrictions placed on performance of EPPs by infected clinicians in the UK have had a particularly significant impact on dentists, because of the exposure-prone nature of most dental procedures and the difficulties in identifying alternative career pathways in the profession that do not involve EPPs. More recently, the significant positive impact of antiviral drugs on viral load together with a re-categorisation of EPPs in dentistry have resulted in evolution of the guidance with a consequent significant improvement to the career prospects of dentists infected with BBVs. This paper provides an update for practitioners on the progress that has been made and outlines the current position with respect to practice restrictions.

No abstract