HIV risk perception and testing behaviours among men having sex with men (MSM) reporting potential transmission risks in the previous 12 months from a large online sample of MSM living in Germany.
HIV risk perception and testing behaviours among men having sex with men (MSM) reporting potential transmission risks in the previous 12 months from a large online sample of MSM living in Germany.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1186/s12889-016-3759-5
复制
发表时间：
2016-10-22
影响因子：
4.5
通讯作者：
Drewes J
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Marcus U;Gassowski M;Drewes J
艾滋病毒检测和对血清状况的认识对于执行生物医学战略（以治疗为预防;口服化学预防）和有效的基于血清状况的行为（艾滋病毒血清分类;战略定位）至关重要。分析的重点是报告的性风险，感知的艾滋病毒感染的风险，和艾滋病毒检测行为之间的关联，以确定最相关的障碍，艾滋病毒检测之间的男男性行为者之间的摄取生活在德国。2013年，MSM被招募参加了一项全国性的匿名在线调查，该调查是在MSM社交网络/约会网站上进行的。问题涉及检测行为、检测决定的原因和艾滋病毒风险认知（5分制）。其他问题涉及支持家庭/家庭收集检测（HT）的论点。使用描述性统计和logistic回归分析，我们比较了报告最近HIV检测（RT;前12个月）的男性与既往未诊断为HIV的子样本中从未检测（NT）的男性，以及报告在前12个月内与HIV血清状态未知的非稳定伴侣发生≥2次无安全套肛交（CLAI）的男性。子样品由775个RT（RT的13%）和396个NT（NT的7%）组成。在过去12个月内，两组之间与HIV状态未知的非稳定性伴侣发生CLAI的次数没有显著差异，但RT报告的伴侣数量显著更高（>5个AI伴侣：65对44%）。虽然两组之间关于最后一次AI的感知风险相当，但49 vs. 30%的NT <30岁，更多地居住在居民人数<10万的城镇/村庄（60%对39%），对于被男人吸引，（aOR 10.1; 6.9-14.8），更常被确定为双性恋（aOR 3.5; 2.5-4.8），并报告较低的测试意图（aOR 0.08; 0.06-0.11）。感知风险（67%）和常规检测（49%）是RT最常见的检测原因，而坚信不会被感染（59%）、各种担忧（41%）和对检测呈阳性的恐惧（35%）是NT的主要原因。NT强调更多的匿名性（aOR 3.2; 2.4-4.4），更少的尴尬（aOR 2.8; 1.9-4.1），避免讨论性行为（aOR 1.6; 1.1-2.2），有利于HT。感知的合作伙伴的知识和原因，反映了感知同性恋和艾滋病毒相关的耻辱预测检测的决定，而不是风险的看法。应进一步降低获得检测的障碍，例如，提供负担得起的HT，解决结构性障碍（耻辱），并强调血清状况意识的有益方面。本文的在线版本（doi：10.1186/s12889-016-3759-5）包含补充材料，可供授权用户使用。
HIV testing and serostatus awareness are essential to implement biomedical strategies (treatment as prevention; oral chemoprophylaxis), and for effective serostatus-based behaviours (HIV serosorting; strategic positioning). The analysis focuses on the associations between reported sexual risks, the perceived risk for HIV infection, and HIV testing behaviour in order to identify the most relevant barriers for HIV test uptake among MSM living in Germany. MSM were recruited to a nationwide anonymous online-survey in 2013 on MSM social networking/dating sites. Questions covered testing behaviours, reasons for testing decisions, and HIV risk perception (5-point scale). Additional questions addressed arguments in favour of home/ home collection testing (HT). Using descriptive statistics and logistic regression we compared men reporting recent HIV testing (RT; previous 12 month) with men never tested (NT) in a subsample not previously diagnosed with HIV and reporting ≥2 episodes of condomless anal intercourse (CLAI) with a non-steady partner of unknown HIV serostatus in the previous 12 months. The subsample consisted of 775 RT (13 % of RT) and 396 NT (7 % of NT). The number of CLAI episodes in the last 12 months with non-steady partners of unknown HIV status did not differ significantly between the groups, but RT reported significantly higher numbers of partners (>5 AI partners: 65 vs. 44 %). While perceived risks regarding last AI were comparable between the groups, 49vs. 30 % NT were <30 years, lived more often in towns/villages <100,000 residents (60 vs. 39 %), were less out-particularly towards care providers-about being attracted to men (aOR 10.1; 6.9–14.8), more often identified as bisexual (aOR 3.5; 2.5–4.8), and reported lower testing intentions (aOR 0.08; 0.06–0.11). Perceived risks (67 %) and routine testing (49 %) were the most common testing reasons for RT, while the strong belief not to be infected (59 %) and various worries (41 %) and fears of testing positive (35 %) were predominant reasons of NT. Greater anonymity (aOR 3.2; 2.4–4.4), less embarrassment, (aOR 2.8; 1.9–4.1), and avoiding discussions on sexual behaviour (aOR 1.6; 1.1–2.2) were emphasized in favour of HT by NT. Perceived partner knowledge and reasons reflecting perceived gay- and HIV-related stigma predicted testing decisions rather than risk perception. Access barriers for testing should be further lowered, e.g. by making affordable HT available, addressing structural barriers (stigma), and emphasizing beneficial aspects of serostatus awareness. The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12889-016-3759-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
2.9
作者：
den Daas C;Doppen M;Schmidt AJ;Op de Coul E
通讯作者：
Op de Coul E
影响因子：
3.1
作者：
MacKellar, Duncan A.;Hou, Su-I;Sullivan, Patrick
通讯作者：
Sullivan, Patrick
DOI：
10.1097/qai.0b013e31825af890
发表时间：
2012-09-01
影响因子：
3.6
作者：
Cowan, Susan Alice;Gerstoft, Jan;Obel, Niels
通讯作者：
Obel, Niels
影响因子：
3.8
作者：
Supervie, Virginie;Ndawinz, Jacques D. A.;Costagliola, Dominique
通讯作者：
Costagliola, Dominique
DOI：
10.1080/09540121.2013.824543
发表时间：
2014-03-04
影响因子：
1.7
作者：
Knussen, Christina;Flowers, Paul;McDaid, Lisa M.
通讯作者：
McDaid, Lisa M.