No abstract

This paper draws upon a qualitative study of Scottish gay men's understandings of HIV testing to explore the importance and changing understandings of ‘community’ within gay men's HIV risk‐management. Nineteen men took part in one‐to‐one interviews, and 18 men took part in focus group discussions concerning HIV testing, HIV status and HIV risk‐management. These discussions were subsequently analysed for recurrent themes using Interpretive Phenomenlogical Analysis. We focus on the ways in which new health technologies have afforded a process of ‘othering’: creating the social exclusion of known or assumed HIV positive men, and thus contributing to the fragmenting of the gay community. Further, we argue that, through shifting HIV avoidance mechanisms from their originally collective level to that of the individual, such technologies have had the unintended consequence of facilitating inadequate lay constructions of risk‐management, potentially putting gay men at risk of HIV infection. Copyright © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

ObjectivesThe aim of the study was to explore preparedness for the HIV self‐test among men who have sex with men (MSM) and those involved in HIV prevention and care.MethodsA mixed methods exploratory research design was employed, detailing awareness and willingness to use the self‐test and the perceived barriers and facilitators to implementation. Quantitative and qualitative data collection and analysis were completed in parallel. Descriptive and inferential analysis of cross‐sectional bar‐based survey data collected from MSM through a self‐completed questionnaire and oral fluid specimen collection (n = 999) was combined with qualitative, thematic, analysis of data collected through 12 expert focus groups (n = 55) consisting of gay men, National Health Service (NHS) staff, community organizations, entrepreneurs and activists. Findings were subsequently combined and assessed for synergies.ResultsAmong MSM, self‐test awareness was moderate (55%). Greater awareness was associated with increased educational attainment [adjusted odds ratio 1.51; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.00–2.30; P = 0.05] and previous history of sexually transmitted infection (STI) testing (adjusted odds ratio 1.63; 95% CI 1.11–2.39; P = 0.01). Willingness to use the test was high (89%) and associated with meeting sexual partners online (unadjusted odds ratio 1.96; 95% CI 1.31–2.94; P < 0.001). Experts highlighted the overall acceptability of self‐testing; it was understood as convenient, discreet, accessible, and with a low burden to services. However, some ambivalence towards self‐testing was reported; it could reduce opportunities to engage with wider services, wider health issues and the determinants of risk.ConclusionsSelf‐testing represents an opportunity to reduce barriers to HIV testing and enhance prevention and access to care. Levels of awareness are moderate but willingness to use is high. Self‐testing may amplify health inequalities.

This paper evaluates the effectiveness of a bar-based, peer-led community-level intervention to promote sexual health amongst gay men. The intervention consisted of peer education within bars, gay specific genitourinary medicine (GUM) services and a free-phone hotline. Data were collected at baseline (1996) and at follow-up (1999) in gay bars in Glasgow (intervention city) and Edinburgh (control city). During the intervention peer educators interacted with 1484 men and new clients increased at the gay specific GUM service. However, the hotline was under-utilized and abused. The outcome measures were: reported hepatitis B vaccination; HIV testing; unprotected anal intercourse (UAI) with casual partners; negotiated safety; and amongst men reporting UAI with a regular partner, the proportion who knew their own and their partner's HIV status. Significant differences in sexual health behaviours were observed across locations and across time, but the only significant intervention effects were amongst men who had direct contact with the intervention, with higher uptake of hepatitis B vaccination and HIV testing. The intervention did not produce community-wide changes in sexual health behaviours. These results question the replication and transferability of peer-led, community-level sexual health promotion for gay men outwith the USA and across time.

Low levels of chemsex among men who have sex with men, but high levels of risk among men who engage in chemsex: analysis of a cross-sectional online survey across four countries. Sexual Health, 15(2), pp. 144-150. (doi:10.1071/SH17159) This is the author's final accepted version.There may be differences between this version and the published version. You are advised to consult the publisher's version if you wish to cite from it.http://eprints.gla.ac.uk/155204/ Nevertheless, MSM who engage in chemsex (MWEC) reported substantial sexual risk inequalities. These novel findings highlight several opportunities for intervention, particularly around the multiple vulnerabilities of MWEC, opportunities for early identification of those most vulnerable to chemsex-related harm and the potential to develop a specialised responsive patient pathway.

BackgroundRecent clinical trials suggest that pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) may reduce HIV transmission by up to 86% for men who have sex with men (MSM), whilst relatively high levels of PrEP acceptability have been reported to date. This study examines PrEP awareness amongst sub-groups of MSM communities and acceptability amongst MSM in a low prevalence region (Scotland, UK), using a mixed methods design.MethodsQuantitative surveys of n = 690 MSM recruited online via social and sociosexual media were analysed using descriptive statistics and multivariate logistic regression. In addition, n = 10 in-depth qualitative interviews with MSM were analysed thematically.ResultsUnder one third (29.7%) of MSM had heard of PrEP, with awareness related to living in large cities, degree level education, commercial gay scene use and reporting an HIV test in the last year. Just under half of participants (47.8%) were likely to use PrEP if it were available but there was no relationship between PrEP acceptability and previous PrEP awareness. Younger men (18–25 years) and those who report higher risk UAI were significantly more likely to say they would use PrEP. Qualitative data described specific PrEP scenarios, illustrating how risk, patterns of sexual practice and social relationships could affect motivation for and nature of PrEP use.ConclusionThese findings suggest substantial interest PrEP amongst MSM reporting HIV risk behaviours in Scotland. Given the Proud results, there is a strong case to investigate PrEP implementation within the UK. However, it appears that disparities in awareness have already emerged along traditional indicators of inequality. Our research identifies the need for comprehensive support when PrEP is introduced, including a key online component, to ensure equity of awareness across diverse MSM communities (e.g. by geography, education, gay scene use and HIV proximity), as well as to responding to the diverse informational and sexual health needs of all MSM communities.

An increasing number of studies refer to sexual wellbeing and/or seek to measure it, and the term appears across various policy documents, including sexual health frameworks in the UK.We conducted a rapid review to determine how sexual wellbeing has been defined, qualitatively explored and quantitatively measured. Eligible studies selected for inclusion from OVID Medline, PsychInfo, PubMed, Embase, CINAHL were: in English language, published after 2007, were peer-reviewed full articles, focused on sexual wellbeing (or proxies for, e.g. satisfaction, function), and quantitatively or qualitatively assessed sexual wellbeing. We included studies with participants aged 16-65. Given study heterogeneity, our synthesis and findings are reported using a narrative approach. We identified 162 papers, of which 10 offered a definition of sexual wellbeing. Drawing upon a socio-ecological model, we categorised the 59 dimensions we identified from studies under three main domains: cognitive-affect (31 dimensions); inter-personal (22 dimensions); and socio-cultural (6 dimensions). Only 11 papers were categorised under the socio-cultural domain, commonly focusing on gender inequalities or stigma. We discuss the importance of conceptualising sexual wellbeing as individually experienced but socially and structurally influenced, including assessing sexual wellbeing freedom: a person's freedom to achieve sexual wellbeing, or their real opportunities and liberties.

Conclusions Low levels of PrEP awareness were reported across these Celtic nations.Only one third of high risk MSM had heard of PrEP but over one half would be willing to take a daily pill to prevent HIV infection. Sociodemographic factors, commercial gay scene proximity, and social network use were unrelated to considering PrEP use. However those reporting most CAI partners were more likely to consider PrEP use.3