Measuring and understanding the attitudes of Australian gay and bisexual men towards biomedical HIV prevention using cross-sectional data and factor analyses

Abstract

Better understanding of community attitudes is crucial for shaping policy and informing initiatives that aim to improve knowledge, acceptance and uptake of biomedical prevention. Our analyses suggest confidence in, acceptability of and community support for PrEP among GBM. However, strategies to address scepticism towards HIV treatment when used for prevention may be needed to optimise combination biomedical HIV prevention.

Trends in Human Immunodeficiency Virus and Sexually Transmitted Infection Testing Among Gay, Bisexual, and Other Men Who Have Sex With Men After Rapid Scale-up of Preexposure Prophylaxis in Victoria, Australia

“…This rapid enrolment may be attributed to predominance of grassroots awareness raising that was driven by Victorian PrEP activists and community organizations who were study coinvestigators, 16 and establishment of an online PrEP importation assistance program. 26 These activities, and findings from a number of other studies, 27 , 28 suggest a highly engaged and health-literate GBM community in Victoria. Although these actions contributed to Victorian GBMs willingness for PrEP, a register of interest and use of existing services provided the structure necessary for rapid enrolment.…”

Implementation outcome instruments for use in physical healthcare settings: a systematic review

“…2 ). The number of studies assessing implementation outcome measures has increased over time, with one study published in 1998 [ 79 ], through to eight studies published in 2018/2019 [ 27 , 42 , 45 , 49 , 56 , 62 , 76 , 77 ]. Studies were predominantly conducted in high-income countries, with the majority conducted in the USA alone ( n = 22) [ 25 , 29 , 30 , 35 , 37 – 39 , 44 , 46 , 47 , 53 , 57 , 58 , 64 , 66 , 67 ].…”

“…Organisation-level analysis was observed for scales assessing penetration and sustainability, though the overall number of these scales was small. Summary of level of analysis across outcomes as follows: Acceptability: consumer = 10 [ 23 , 37 , 39 , 41 , 42 , 44 , 51 , 52 , 57 , 59 ], provider = 27 [ 24 – 36 , 38 , 40 , 43 , 45 – 50 , 53 – 56 , 58 ] Appropriateness: consumer = 3 [ 61 – 63 ], provider = 3 [ 46 , 60 , 64 ], both consumer and provider = 1 [ 65 ] Adoption: consumer = 1 [ 66 ], provider = 3 [ 67 – 69 ] Feasibility: provider = 4 [ 46 , 70 , 71 , 80 ] Penetration: organisation = 4 [ 72 – 75 ] Sustainability: provider = 2 [ 76 , 77 ], organisation = 2 [ 78 , 79 ] …”

“…Acceptability: consumer = 10 [23,37,39,41,42,44,51,52,57,59], provider = 27 [24-36, 38, 40, 43, 45-50, 53-56, 58] Appropriateness: consumer = 3 [61][62][63], provider = 3 [46,60,64], both consumer and provider = 1 [65] Adoption: consumer = 1 [66], provider = 3 [67][68][69] Feasibility: provider = 4 [46,70,71,80] Penetration: organisation = 4 [72][73][74][75] Sustainability: provider = 2 [76,77], organisation = 2 [78,79] Methodological quality Table 1 presents the global COSMIN scores for reliability, validity and responsiveness, and rank orders the instruments by descending reliability scores. Detailed COSMIN scores for individual measurement properties are presented in Additional file 3.…”

Highlights from this issue

“…Finally this month’s research offering includes an important report on a high HIV incidence population of men who have sex with men in the United States13 and an exploration of Australian MSM views on biomedical approaches to prevention 14…”