Search

Copyright of Promotion de la Santé et Prévention des Maladies Chroniques au Canada is the property of Public Health Agency of Canada and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

In this article, we argue that current digital health strategies across Canada do not appropriately consider the implications of digital technologies (DTs) for public health functions because they adopt a primarily clinical focus. We highlight differences between clinical medicine and public health, suggesting that conceptualizing digital public health (DPH) as a field distinct from, but related to, digital health is essential for the development of DTs in public health. Focussing on DPH may allow for DTs that deeply consider fundamental public health principles of health equity, social justice and action on the social and ecological determinants of health. Moreover, the digital transformation of health services catalyzed by the COVID-19 pandemic and changing public expectations about the speed and convenience of public health services necessitate a specific DPH focus. This imperative is reinforced by the need to address the growing role of DTs as determinants of health that influence health behaviours and outcomes. Making the distinction between DPH and digital health will require more specific DPH strategies that are aligned with emergent digital strategies across Canada, development of intersectoral transdisciplinary partnerships and updated competencies of the public health workforce to ensure that DTs in public health can improve health outcomes for all Canadians. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: GetCheckedOnline is an internet-based screening service aiming to increase HIV testing among gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men (GBMSM). We assessed the cost-effectiveness of GetCheckedOnline in its first implementation phase at different uptake scenarios compared to clinic-based screening services alone in Metro Vancouver, Canada. Methods: From a healthcare payer's perspective, our cost-utility analysis used an established dynamic GBMSM HIV compartmental model estimating the probability of acquiring HIV, progressing through diagnosis, disease stages and treatment over a 30-year time horizon. The base case scenario assumed 4.7% uptake of GetCheckedOnline in 2016 (remainder using clinic-based services), with 74% of high-risk and 44% of low-risk infrequent testers becoming regular testers in five years. Scenario analyses tested increased GetCheckedOnline uptake to 10% and 15%. Results: The cost per test for GetCheckedOnline was $29.40 compared to clinic-based services $56.92. Compared with clinic-based screening services, the projected increase in testing frequency with 4.7% uptake of GetCheckedOnline increased the costs by $329,600 (95% Credible Interval: -$498,200, $571,000) and gained 4.53 (95%CrI: 0, 9.20) quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) in a 30-year time horizon. The probability of GetCheckedOnline being cost-effective was 34% at the threshold of $50,000 per QALY, and increased to 73% at the threshold of $100,000 per QALY. The results were consistent in the other uptake scenarios. The probability of GetCheckedOnline being cost-effective became 80% at the threshold of $50,000 per QALY if assuming 5-year time horizon. Conclusions: GetCheckedOnline is almost half the cost of clinic-based services on a per-test basis. However, increased access to testing should be balanced with risk profiles of patients to ensure the implementation can be a cost-effective strategy for increasing HIV screening among GBMSM in Metro Vancouver. Additional analyses are needed to understand the impact of internet-based screening including screening for other STIs and in other populations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Anxiety is common among sexual health service users. Accessible, anonymous online sexual health services may offer opportunities to connect users with mental health services, but little is known about anxiety in these settings. We sought to characterise expressions of anxiety among chat users and nurse responses to anxiety.Methods: We conducted inductive thematic analysis of transcripts from an anonymous online sexual health chat service moderated by sexual health nurses.Results: Among chat users, we identified: worry, anxiety, and emotional distress, particularly regarding HIV transmission risk, testing, and symptoms; exaggerated appraisal of HIV-transmission risk associated with sex-related shame and stigma; and patterns of anxiety that were unresolved by HIV education or testing interventions. Although nurses recognised and acknowledged anxiety, their responses to this anxiety varied; some provided anxiety management information, while others offered sexual health education and risk assessment.Conclusions: Targeted interventions addressing HIV-related stigma and anxiety among online sexual health service users are needed to facilitate connections to appropriate mental health supports. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A wide variety of risk calculators estimate individuals' risk for HIV/sexually transmitted infections (STI) online. These tools can help target HIV/STI screening and optimize clinical decision-making. Yet, little evidence exists on suitable features for these tools to be acceptable to end-users. We investigated the desirable characteristics of risk calculators among STI clinic clients and testing service providers. Participants interacted with online HIV/STI risk calculators featuring varied target audiences, completion lengths, and message outputs. Thematic analysis of focus groups identified six qualities that would make risk calculators more appealing for online client use: providing personalized risk assessments based on users' specific sexual behaviors and HIV/STI-related concerns; incorporating nuanced risk assessment and tailored educational information; supplying quantifiable risk estimates; using non-stigmatizing and inclusive framing; including explanations and next steps; and developing effective and appropriate branding. Incorporating these features in the design of online HIV/STI risk calculators may improve their acceptability among end-users. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Internet-based sexually transmitted and blood-borne infection (STBBI) testing services reduce testing barriers through bypassing face-to-face clinical encounters, potentially enabling clients at ongoing sexual risk to test more frequently. To our knowledge, this hypothesis has not been previously tested. We compared the frequency of repeat testing between Vancouver-based clients of GetCheckedOnline (GCO)-an internet-based STBBI testing service in British Columbia, Canada-and clients of three sexually transmitted infection (STI) clinics in Vancouver for 29 months after GCO launched.Methods: An administrative data cohort (n=19 497) was assembled using GCO, clinical and laboratory databases. We included all individuals who tested for HIV, gonorrhoea/chlamydia, syphilis or hepatitis C at three STI clinics or using GCO, between September 2014 and February 2017. The rate of repeat testing (>30 days after first episode) was compared between clients who used GCO at least once and those who tested only in STI clinics. Poisson regression was used to generate relative rate (RR) for repeat testing, with adjustment for age, gender/sexual orientation, risk factors (eg, history of STI diagnosis) and rate of testing before GCO launched.Results: 1093 GCO clients were identified, of whom 434 (40%) had repeat test episodes; 8200/18 404 (45%) of clinic clients tested more than once. During the 29-month analysis period, GCO clients repeat tested 1.87 times per person-year, whereas clinic clients repeat tested 1.53 times per person-year, resulting in a crude RR of 1.22 (95% CI: 1.14 to 1.31). Adjustment for covariates increased the RR to 1.26 (95% CI: 1.15 to 1.37).Conclusions: In this cohort, individuals using internet-based STBBI testing had a rate of repeat testing 22% greater than clinic-based clients. This effect was increased after adjusting for characteristics associated with higher test frequency. The online interface of GCO may facilitate more frequent testing and may therefore contribute to earlier STBBI diagnosis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Internet-based STI testing programmes may overcome barriers posed by in-clinic testing, though uptake could reflect social gradients. The role these services play in comparison to clinical testing services is unknown. We compared experiences of testing barriers between STI clinic clients to clients of GetCheckedOnline.com (GCO; where clients take a printed lab form to a lab).Methods: Our 10-month cross-sectional study was conducted after GCO was promoted to STI clinic clients and men who have sex with men (MSM). Clinic and GCO clients completed an online survey assessing testing barriers and facilitators; responses were compared using bivariate analysis (level of significance P<0.01; significant results below).Results: Compared with 321 clinic clients, the 73 GCO clients were more likely to be older (median 35 vs 30 years), MSM (45% vs 16%), be testing routinely (67% vs 39%), have delayed testing for any reason (76% vs 54%) and due to clinic distance (28% vs 9%), report delays due to wait times (50% vs 17%), embarrassment with testing (16% vs 6%), discomfort discussing sexual health where they usually go for testing (39% vs 22%), as well as discomfort discussing sexual history with (19% vs 5%) and fearing judgement from (30% vs 15%) any healthcare provider. GCO clients were less likely to have found clinic hours convenient (59% vs 77%) and clinic appointments easy to make (49% vs 66%), and more likely to report long wait times (50% vs 17%). We found no differences in technology skills/use.Conclusions: In this urban setting, an internet-based testing service effectively engaged individuals experiencing testing barriers, with few social gradients in uptake. While some testing barriers could be addressed through increasing access to clinical services, others require social and structural changes, highlighting the importance of internet-based STI testing services to increasing test uptake. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To describe the factors that influence gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men's (gbMSM) experiences with GetCheckedOnline.com (GCO) in British Columbia (BC), Canada. GCO clients complete an internet-based risk assessment and print a laboratory test requisition form for HIV and other STIs to take to a private laboratory for diagnostic services.Methods: Drawing on a purposive stratified sampling framework, we conducted 37 in-depth semistructured interviews with gbMSM who had used GCO at least once between 2015 and 2017.Results: Participants expressed a preference for GCO (instead of clinic-based testing) because of convenience, privacy and control over specimen collection (specifically with doing one's own throat or anal swab). Participants preferred receiving their results online via GCO compared with phone or email follow-up by clinic staff. GCO was viewed positively because it offers gbMSM living outside of urban city centres easy access to diagnostic services, including access to pooled nucleic acid amplification testing. Many participants also continued to positively view the clinic-based services available for gbMSM in their community. These services were frequently described as highly competent, tailored and comprehensive in responding to more complex needs. For example, attending a clinic was viewed as preferential to GCO in instances where there was a desire to access services addressing co-occurring health issues (eg, mental health; substance use disorders). Almost all of the participants anticipated using both GCO and clinic-based services in the future.Conclusions: gbMSM report positive experiences and perceptions of GCO; however, they do not view GCO as a panacea. The results of this study point to the need to ensure that a wide range of integrated service options (eg, online; clinic-based) are available to address the range of sexual health needs of gbMSM living in BC's diverse settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Internet-based HIV testing offers the potential to address privacy-related barriers to testing and increase frequency of testing but may result in missed opportunities related to sexual health education and prevention that typically occur in face-to-face encounters. In this study, we assessed the HIV test knowledge and sexual risk behaviour of clients testing for HIV through GetCheckedOnline, an internet-based sexually transmitted and bloodborne infection testing platform inclusive of HIV testing, in comparison to clients testing through a large sexual health clinic.Methods: We concurrently recruited GetCheckedOnline clients and clinic clients from Vancouver, Canada, over the course of a 10-month period during 2015-2016. Participants completed baseline and 3-month questionnaires, anonymous and online. A six-item score was used to estimate knowledge of HIV test concepts typically conveyed during an HIV pretest encounter in a clinic. We used multiple regression to estimate associations between testing modality (online vs clinic based) and two outcomes-HIV test knowledge and change in condom use pre/post-test-with adjustment for relevant background factors.Results: Among 352 participants, online testers demonstrated higher HIV post-test knowledge than clinic-based testers (mean score 4.65/6 vs 4.09/6; p<0.05); this difference was reduced in adjusted analysis (p>0.05). Men who have sex with men, clients with a university degree, those who have lived in Canada >10 years and English speakers had higher HIV post-test knowledge (p<0.05). Eighteen per cent of online testers and 10% of clinic-based testers increased condom use during the 3 months post-test (p>0.05).Conclusions: In this comparative study between online and clinic-based testers, we found no evidence of decreased HIV test knowledge or decreased condom use following HIV testing through GetCheckedOnline. Our findings suggest that with careful design and attention to educational content, online testing services may not lead to missed opportunities for HIV education and counselling. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Online health services are a rapidly growing aspect of public health provision, including testing for sexually transmitted and other blood-borne infections (STBBI). Generally, healthcare providers, policymakers, and clients imbue online approaches with great positive potential (e.g., encouraging clients' agency; providing cost-effective services to more clients). However, the promise of online health services may vary across contexts and be perceived in negative or ambiguous ways (e.g., risks to 'gold standard' care provision; loss of provider control over an intervention; uncertainty related to budget implications). This study examines attitudes and perceptions regarding the development of a novel online STBBI testing service in Vancouver, Canada. We examine the perceptions about the intervention's potential by interviewing practitioners and planners who were engaged in the development and initial implementation of this testing service.Methods: We conducted in-depth interviews with 37 healthcare providers, administrators, policymakers, and community-based service providers engaged in the design and launch of the new online STBBI testing service. We also conducted observations during planning and implementation meetings for the new service. Thematic analysis techniques were employed to identify codes and broader discursive themes across the interview transcripts and observation notes.Results: Some study participants expressed concern that the potential popularity of the new testing service might increase demand on existing sexual health services or become fiscally unsustainable. However, most participants regarded the new service as having the potential to improve STBBI testing in several ways, including reducing waiting times, enhancing privacy and confidentiality, appealing to more tech-savvy sub-populations, optimizing the redistribution of demands on face-to-face service provision, and providing patient-centred technology to empower clients to seek testing.Conclusions: Participants perceived this online STBBI testing service to have the potential to improve sexual health care provision. But, they also anticipated actions-and-reactions, revealing a need to monitor ongoing implementation dynamics. They also identified the larger, potentially system-transforming dimension of the new technology, which enables new system drivers (consumers) and reduces the amount of control health care providers have over online STBBI testing compared to conventional in-person testing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article evaluates website for online testing of sexually transmitted infections (STI) located at www.getcheckedonline.com developed by BC Centre for Disease Control (BCCDC), and offers details of the service available in Canada, instructions for patients having positive results, and diagram on the method to be followed.

The article focuses on the availability of the inSPOT software in British Columbia for people choosing to notify their partners about sexually transmitted infection (STI). The software, which was developed by Internet Sexuality Information Services in 2004 and implemented across North America, allows people to send electronic postcards to their sex partners to tell them that they should get tested for STIs. It also notes the success of the software use in other places among people with STIs.