Search

ObjectivesA detailed understanding of intentions and practices related to partner notification (PN) following STI diagnosis can improve control strategies. We assessed participant-level and partner-level factors guiding notification behaviour among men who have sex with men and/or with transgender women (MSM-TW) in Lima, Peru, including discordances between anticipated and actual notification.MethodsMen newly diagnosed with gonorrhoea, chlamydia and/or syphilis between 2012 and 2014 reported recent partners' characteristics, anticipated PN practices, and actual PN outcomes following diagnosis. Generalised estimating equation Poisson regression analyses assessed factors guiding PN outcomes.ResultsParticipants (n=150) predominantly identified as homosexual (70%) and moderno (versatile sexual role, 55%); 55% of partners (n=402) were casual. Among all sexual partners, 35% were notified of the STI diagnosis, though only 51% of predicted PN occurred and 26% of actual notifications were unanticipated. 47% of participants notified no partners, while 24% notified all partners. PN was more common with stable versus casual (adjusted prevalence ratio (aPR), 95% CI: 0.53, 0.39 to 0.73) or commercial (aPR, 95% CI: 0.38, 0.12 to 1.21) partners, and among participants who perceived PN as normative among their peers (aPR, 95% CI: 1.96, 1.37 to 2.82). A trend towards greater notification following condom-protected intercourse was observed (aPR, 95% CI: 1.33, 0.98 to 1.81). PN frequency did not differ by type of STI diagnosed.Anticipated notification predicted actual notification (aPR, 95% CI: 1.67, 1.19 to 2.33) only imperfectly: 81 (54%) participants' PN practices did not match their anticipated behaviour. Successful notification despite anticipated silence (40 participants, 63 partners) was associated with stable partnerships and a normative perception of PN. Non-notification despite intention (43 participants, 73 partners) frequently occurred among participants reporting exclusively oral sex with the partner or with partners identified as activo (insertive role).ConclusionsAnticipated notification imperfectly reflects actual PN behaviour. Future interventions to improve PN among MSM-TW in Peru need to acknowledge partnership contexts.

PurposeBoth hormone therapy (HT) and antiretroviral therapy (ART) can be lifesaving for transgender women (TW) living with HIV, but each has side effects and potential drug-drug interactions (DDI). We assessed how concerns about HT-ART interactions affect treatment adherence.MethodsThis study used a cross-sectional survey of TW (n = 87) in Los Angeles, CA.ResultsFifty-four percent were living with HIV; 64% used HT. Only 49% of TW living with HIV discussed ART-HT DDI with their provider; 40% reported not taking ART (12%), HT (12%), or both (16%) as directed due to DDI concerns.ConclusionImperfect HT/ART use and limited provider communication suggests a need for improved HT-ART integration.

Expedited partner therapy involves prescribing sexually transmitted infection (STI) treatment for a patient's partner(s) without seeing the partner. It is approved for heterosexual partners of patients with chlamydia in most states. However, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends against expedited partner therapy in men-who-have-sex-with-men (MSM), citing limited data in this population and concerns that expedited partner therapy could discourage comprehensive STI testing, thereby driving increased HIV transmission. In this piece, we describe the case of a 33-year-old gay man on HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) whose cycle of chlamydia reinfection might have been prevented by expedited partner therapy. His case highlights how new HIV prevention strategies--including PrEP and Treatment as Prevention--challenge the assumption that all MSM with chlamydia are at risk for HIV. Until more data on expedited partner therapy in MSM are available, clinicians should incorporate characteristics of patients' sexual networks in weighing the risks and benefits of expedited partner therapy. Key words: expedited partner therapy; chlamydia; men who have sex with men; public health policy, A CASE OF RECURRENT CHLAMYDIA HIGHLIGHTS DISPARITIES IN GUIDELINES Our patient, a sexually active, 33-year-old gay man, was worried about his HIV risk, so he sought out HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis [...]

Expanding addiction treatment services in Rhode Island has never been more urgent. Today, we face colliding syndemics of COVID-19, preventable drug overdoses, and HIV, with another year of record overdoses. While the treatment of substance use disorder (SUD) is an essential component of general medical care, numerous barriers prevent broader treatment access for patients in Rhode Island. Buprenorphine and methadone therapy have restrictions that are not applied to other areas in medicine, including for more dangerous medications. In this piece, we highlight existing barriers to care, applaud current progress being made in our state, and provide recommendations for next steps to turn the tide of this deadly epidemic. We hope that these proposed changes will help develop a robust treatment landscape for all patients with SUD in Rhode Island. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]