Building stakeholder partnerships for an on‐site HIV testing programme

Woods, William J.; Erwin, Kathleen; Lazarus, Margery; Serice, Heather; Grinstead, Olga; Binson, Diane

doi:10.1080/13691050701793806

Cited by 19 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The extensive prevention efforts of this particular bathhouse and its local health department are certainly directed towards such goals (Binson, Blea, Cotten, Kant, & Woods, 2005; Huebner, Binson, Woods, Dilworth, Neilands, & Grinstead, 2006; Huebner, Binson, Dilworth, Neilands, Grinstead, & Woods, in press; Woods, Erwin, Lazarus, Serice, Grinstead, & Binson, 2008). However, our survey measure of anal intercourse was inclusive in that men were to report any inserting of penis into anus even for the briefest of moments and even if neither partner achieved orgasm as a consequence of the act.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

HIV Transmission Risk at a Gay Bathhouse

Binson

Pollack

Blair

et al. 2010

Journal of Sex Research

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous research found up to 14% of men who go to bathhouses engage in unprotected anal intercourse (UAI) and tend to have multiple sexual partners during their bathhouse visit, thus appearing to support concerns that such venues could foster acute outbreaks of new HIV infections. We conducted a two-stage probability sample of men exiting a gay bathhouse and focused our analysis on whether the partnering patterns of the men who engaged in UAI present such a risk. Among patrons who had oral or anal sex during their visit (n=758), 16.7% were HIV-positive and 13.9% engaged in UAI. Although men had multiple sex partners during a visit, they had UAI with only one of those partners on average, and withdrawal prior to ejaculation occurred in the vast majority of UAI incidences. Thus, the risk of sexual transmission of HIV during the bathhouse visit was typically within isolated dyads rather than patterns of multiple sexual encounters that might put many men at risk during a single visit, and men who did engage in UAI tended to withdraw prior to ejaculation, potentially mitigating the risk of HIV transmission.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

HIV Transmission Risk at a Gay Bathhouse

Binson

Pollack

Blair

et al. 2010

Journal of Sex Research

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Our findings suggest that one important function of monitoring is to convey the manager’s concern about HIV and patron safety, even if monitoring is simply a matter of “security theater” like the enhanced pat downs at airport security checkpoints. Of course, an alternative to monitoring might be promoting other very visible prevention activities that communicate that the management cares about the patrons’ health and safety, such as on-site HIV testing programs (Binson, Blea, et al, 2005; Daskalakis, et al, 2009; Woods, Erwin, et al, 2008), as well as other programs that have not been evaluated: extensive condom distribution, posted signs and educational materials, special events such as safer-sex demonstrations, outreach programs, and individual counseling services (Woods, Binson, Mayne, et al, 2001; Woods, Euren, et al, 2010). …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Gay Bathhouse HIV Prevention: the Use of Staff Monitoring of Patron Sexual Behavior

et al. 2013

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many HIV prevention interventions have been launched in gay bathhouses and sex clubs since the onset of the AIDS epidemic, such as condom distribution and HIV testing. Perhaps none of these are as intrusive to the venue's environment as what is called "monitoring," which involves staff, during every shift, repeatedly walking throughout the public areas of a bathhouse to check on patrons' sexual behavior. Yet, monitoring has received little evaluation. Between 2002 and 2004, we conducted qualitative interviews with venue managers, staff and patrons in New York City, Los Angeles, and the San Francisco Bay Area. An analysis found that monitoring was influenced by the kinds of space available for sex, suggesting three approaches to monitoring: 1) monitoring all sex in clubs that only had public areas where men had sex ; 2) monitoring some sex in clubs with private rooms for sex; and 3) no monitoring of sex, regardless of the kinds of space for sex. This paper explores each approach as described by club managers, staff, and patrons to understand the potential effectiveness of monitoring as an HIV prevention intervention.

show abstract

“…Venues for conducting the testing appear to have an impact on the success of reaching at-risk populations. Some researchers have taken rapid oral HIV testing to locations that attract people at high risk for HIV infection, such as bars, bath houses and parks (Woods et al, 2008). However, some people refuse testing in outreach settings, citing among other reasons concerns about confidentiality of results (Bowles et al, 2008).…”

Section: Hiv Testing In the Communitymentioning

confidence: 99%

A Communicative Analysis of a Sexual Health Screening Intervention Conducted in a Low-Income Housing Complex

Scott

Elia

Golden

2015

Journal of Applied Communication Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Providing free HIV screening within public housing sites offers the potential for increased participation of at-risk populations. Residential-based screening, however, raises concerns about privacy because of the stigma attached to HIV/AIDS and even to the testing for HIV. This study examined the effectiveness of offering HIV screening within a public housing high-rise in upstate New York. Through interviews with both women who obtained testing and those who did not, this study explored the tension between convenience and privacy concerns. The findings suggest that offering HIV screening where people live could encourage participation in the screenings, as well as lead to a destigmatization of HIV testing over time. Some women chose to eschew the convenience of on-site testing in favor of a more private venue for screening, whereas some women responded positively to the accessibility of on-site testing, using communicative strategies to manage privacy concerns.

show abstract

Building stakeholder partnerships for an on‐site HIV testing programme

Cited by 19 publications

References 31 publications

HIV Transmission Risk at a Gay Bathhouse

HIV Transmission Risk at a Gay Bathhouse

Gay Bathhouse HIV Prevention: the Use of Staff Monitoring of Patron Sexual Behavior

A Communicative Analysis of a Sexual Health Screening Intervention Conducted in a Low-Income Housing Complex

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About