Transactional Sex and Incident Chlamydia and Gonorrhea Among Black Men Who Have Sex With Men in Atlanta, Georgia.
Transactional Sex and Incident Chlamydia and Gonorrhea Among Black Men Who Have Sex With Men in Atlanta, Georgia.
复制标题
佐治亚州亚特兰大男男性行为黑人中的性交易和衣原体和淋病事件。
DOI:
10.1097/olq.0000000000001168
复制
发表时间:
2020
影响因子:
3.1
通讯作者:
Earnshaw,ValerieA
中科院分区:
文献类型:
--
作者:
Rucinski,KatherineB;Eaton,LisaA;Learner,EmilyR;Watson,RyanJ;Maksut,JessicaL;Earnshaw,ValerieA
BackgroundBlack men who have sex with men (BMSM) are disproportionately affected by sexually transmitted infections (STI), including chlamydia and gonorrhea. Transactional sex is an hypothesized risk factor for STI acquisition in BMSM.MethodsWe estimated the association of transactional sex with incident chlamydia/gonococcal infection among BMSM using longitudinal data from a randomized trial in Atlanta (2012–2015). BMSM were eligible for inclusion if they tested human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-antibody-negative and reported both≥ 2 male sex partners and any condomless anal sex in the last year. We defined chlamydia/gonorrhea incidence as the first occurrence of either rectal or urogenital chlamydia or gonococcal infections after a negative result at enrollment. We used Poisson regression to estimate the incidence rate (IR) for chlamydia/gonorrhea over 12 months. Incidence rate ratios (IRR) compared estimates by reported experience of transactional sex. Subgroup analyses assessed potential heterogeneity by age and sexual identity.ResultsThis analysis included 416 BMSM, of whom 191 (46%) were gay-identified, 146 (42%) reported a history of transactional sex, and 57 (14%) had prevalent chlamydia/gonococcal infection at baseline. Over a median of 1 year of follow-up, an additional 55 men tested laboratory-positive for chlamydia/gonorrhea (IR, 17.3 per 100 person-years). Transactional sex was not associated with chlamydia/gonorrhea incidence overall. However, among gay-identified BMSM, transactional sex was associated with incident chlamydia/gonorrhea (IRR, 2.9; 95% confidence interval, 1.2–6.8).Conclusions