BackgroundPartner notification (PN) among individuals newly diagnosed with HIV/STI is seen as a vital tool to identify others at risk of infection. However, hardly any data are available on the effectiveness of PN on HIV/STI transmission in the Netherlands. This study aims to fill this gap by assessing current PN practices, case-finding effectiveness, and determinants of being notified among men having sex with men (MSM) in the Netherlands.MethodsNurses from five STI centers participated in a prospective pilot study on PN outcomes (partners being: at risk, notifiable, notified, and tested) for HIV/STI, by completing a newly developed PN registration form (PN database). PN outcomes including case-finding effectiveness (number of newly diagnosed cases in partners/number of partners being tested) for HIV, syphilis, and gonorrhoea were studied among MSM. Furthermore, the national STI database was analyzed to identify determinants of being notified. The number of infections that remained undetected was estimated based on these two databases.ResultsIn total 105 MSM, newly diagnosed with HIV/STI, reported 612 sexual partners at risk of whom 41% were notifiable and 31% were notified. Patient referral was the predominant PN method (90%). The overall case-finding percentage was 36% (HIV: 15-33%, gonorrhoea: 17-50% and syphilis: 4-11%). Case-finding percentages were lower in the national STI database: 21% (5%, 28%, 12%). Persons with one or more sexual partners, known HIV positives, and IDU were more likely to be notified to the STI clinic. Notified clients were more likely to have HIV/STI than unnotified clients (OR 1.7-2.5). Based on these two databases, an estimated 75 to 133 infections remained undetected (HIV: 12–90; gonorrhoea: 28–97; syphilis: 5–12 infections).ConclusionsPartner notification among MSM in the Netherlands is suboptimal; an extensive number of STI/HIV infections remained undetected mainly due to unnotifiable partners. To enhance PN practices, combined and innovative PN interventions such as Internet-based PN will be implemented for hard-to-reach MSM and other risk groups.

Partner notification effectiveness among index clients diagnosed with HIV, syphilis and/or gonorrhoea at sexually transmitted infection (STI) clinics was evaluated between 2010 and 2012. We explored percentages of identifiable, notified and tested partners by sexual preference and gender. Partner notification trends were studied using the national STI database. Men who have sex with men (n = 304), heterosexual men (n = 33) and women (n = 35) reported, respectively, 6.7, 3.8 and 2.3 partners per index. Percentages of identifiable partners differed between groups (men who have sex with men: 46%, heterosexual men: 63%, women: 87%, p < 0.001). The percentage of notified partners (of those identifiable) was lowest for heterosexual men (76%; men who have sex with men: 92%; women: 83%; p < 0.001). STI positivity rates among notified partners were high: 33%-50% depending on sexual preference. Among men who have sex with men, having HIV was associated with not notifying all identifiable partners. Percentages of notified clients at STI clinics increased between 2010 and 2012: from 13% to 19% among men who have sex with men, from 13% to 18% among heterosexual men and from 8% to 11% among women (p < 0.001 for all groups). The percentage of STI/HIV detected through partner notification increased among men who have sex with men (from 22% to 30%) and women (from 25% to 29%; p < 0.001). Unidentifiable partners among men who have sex with men, lower partner notification effectiveness for HIV and the relative large proportion of heterosexual men not notifying their partners appear to be important partner notification challenges.

Coul & the PREVENT study group (2020) Reducing health disparities: key factors for successful implementation of social network testing with HIV self-tests among men who have sex with men with a non-western migration background in the Netherlands,

No abstract

Background The AIDS Healthcare Foundation (AHF-Checkpoint) in The Netherlands offers rapid HIV testing for key populations by lay providers. We explored the experiences and needs of lay providers and end users of HIV testing at AHF-Checkpoint, taking into account the WHO 5C-(consent, confidentiality, counselling, correct-results, connection-to-care) criteria for HIV test services. Methods Qualitative evaluation with 15 semi-structured interviews conducted during 2020 with ten lay providers and five gay or bisexual end users. Recorded interviews were thematically analysed, taking data triangulation into account. Results Four domains were identified: (1) accessibility of HIV testing, (2) quality of test procedures, (3) bridging (transitional care), and (4) future strategies for service delivery. AHF-Checkpoint fills a gap for key populations including LGBTQ and refugees, who experience HIV testing barriers at sexual health centres or general practices. The level of trust between lay providers and end users was highly valued by end users. They appreciated the low threshold to test at no costs, and the absence of waiting lists or triaging. Needs expressed by lay providers included more preparedness for emotionally charged situations, and extra training to improve STI knowledge. End users expressed a need for a full STI test package. Of the 5Cs, consent, counselling, and correct results were realised but confidentiality was sometimes difficult to achieve at pop-up locations, and referral barriers for confirmation testing (connection-to-care) were occasionally experienced by lay providers during weekends. Conclusion AHF-Checkpoint was described as a convenient and easily accessible service by end users and lay providers. Of the WHO 5Cs, connection-to-care could be optimised to ensure HIV confirmation and STI testing through a liaison approach with professionals from the regular healthcare sector.