How did the COVID-19 pandemic affect access to condoms, chlamydia and HIV testing, and cervical cancer screening at a population level in Britain? (Natsal-COVID).

OBJECTIVES: To investigate how differential access to key interventions to reduce STIs, HIV and their sequelae changed during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: British participants (18-59 years) completed a cross-sectional web survey 1 year (March-April 2021) after the initial lockdown in Britain. Quota-based sampling and weighting resulted in a quasi-representative population sample. We compared Natsal-COVID data with Natsal-3, a household-based probability sample cross-sectional survey (16-74 years) conducted in 2010-2012. Reported unmet need for condoms because of the pandemic and uptake of chlamydia testing/HIV testing/cervical cancer screening were analysed among sexually experienced participants (18-44 years) (n=3869, Natsal-COVID; n=8551, Natsal-3). ORs adjusted for age and other potential confounders describe associations with demographic and behavioural factors. RESULTS: In 2021, 6.9% of women and 16.2% of men reported unmet need for condoms because of the pandemic. This was more likely among participants: aged 18-24 years, of black or black British ethnicity, and reporting same-sex sex (past 5 years) or one or more new relationships (past year). Chlamydia and HIV testing were more commonly reported by younger participants, those reporting condomless sex with new sexual partners and men reporting same-sex partners; a very similar distribution to 10 years previously (Natsal-3). However, there were differences during the pandemic, including stronger associations with chlamydia testing for men reporting same-sex partners; with HIV testing for women reporting new sexual partners and with cervical screening among smokers. CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests differential access to key primary and secondary STI/HIV prevention interventions continued during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. However, there was not strong evidence that differential access has changed during the pandemic when compared with 2010-2012. While the pandemic might not have exacerbated inequalities in access to primary and secondary prevention, it is clear that large inequalities persisted, typically among those at greatest STI/HIV risk.

Sexual and reproductive health in Britain during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic: cross-sectional population survey (Natsal-COVID-Wave 2) and national surveillance data.

OBJECTIVES: To assess sexual behaviour, and sexual and reproductive health (SRH) outcomes, after 1 year of the COVID-19 pandemic in Britain. METHODS: 6658 participants aged 18-59 and resident in Britain completed a cross-sectional web-panel survey (Natsal-COVID-Wave 2, March-April 2021), 1 year after the first lockdown. Natsal-COVID-2 follows the Natsal-COVID-Wave 1 survey (July-August 2020) which captured impacts in the initial months. Quota-based sampling and weighting resulted in a quasi-representative population sample. Data were contextualised with reference to the most recent probability sample population data (Natsal-3; collected 2010-12; 15 162 participants aged 16-74) and national surveillance data on recorded sexually transmitted infection (STI) testing, conceptions, and abortions in England/Wales (2010-2020). The main outcomes were: sexual behaviour; SRH service use; pregnancy, abortion and fertility management; sexual dissatisfaction, distress and difficulties. RESULTS: In the year from the first lockdown, over two-thirds of participants reported one or more sexual partners (women 71.8%; men 69.9%), while fewer than 20.0% reported a new partner (women 10.4%; men 16.8%). Median occasions of sex per month was two. Compared with 2010-12 (Natsal-3), we found less sexual risk behaviour (lower reporting of multiple partners, new partners, and new condomless partners), including among younger participants and those reporting same-sex behaviour. One in 10 women reported a pregnancy; pregnancies were fewer than in 2010-12 and less likely to be scored as unplanned. 19.3% of women and 22.8% of men were distressed or worried about their sex life, significantly more than in 2010-12. Compared with surveillance trends from 2010 to 2019, we found lower than expected use of STI-related services and HIV testing, lower levels of chlamydia testing, and fewer conceptions and abortions. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings are consistent with significant changes in sexual behaviour, SRH, and service uptake in the year following the first lockdown in Britain. These data are foundational to SRH recovery and policy planning.

Contraceptive use and pregnancy planning in Britain during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic: findings from a large, quasi-representative survey (Natsal-COVID).

BACKGROUND: Contraceptive services were significantly disrupted during the COVID-19 pandemic in Britain. We investigated contraception-related health inequalities in the first year of the pandemic. METHODS: Natsal-COVID Wave 2 surveyed 6658 adults aged 18-59 years between March and April 2021, using quotas and weighting to achieve quasi-representativeness. Our analysis included sexually active participants aged 18-44 years, described as female at birth. We analysed contraception use, contraceptive switching due to the pandemic, contraceptive service access, and pregnancy plannedness. RESULTS: Of 1488 participants, 1619 were at risk of unplanned pregnancy, of whom 54.1% (51.0%-57.1%) reported routinely using effective contraception in the past year. Among all participants, 14.3% (12.5%-16.3%) reported switching or stopping contraception due to the pandemic. 3.2% (2.0%-5.1%) of those using effective methods pre-pandemic switched to less effective methods, while 3.8% (2.5%-5.9%) stopped. 29.3% (26.9%-31.8%) of at-risk participants reported seeking contraceptive services, of whom 16.4% (13.0%-20.4%) reported difficulty accessing services. Clinic closures and cancelled appointments were commonly reported pandemic-related reasons for difficulty accessing services. This unmet need was associated with younger age, diverse sexual identities and anxiety symptoms. Of 199 pregnancies, 6.6% (3.9%-11.1%) scored as 'unplanned'; less planning was associated with younger age, lower social grade and unemployment. CONCLUSIONS: Just under a third of participants sought contraceptive services during the pandemic and most were successful, indicating resilience and adaptability of service delivery. However, one in six reported an unmet need due to the pandemic. COVID-induced inequalities in service access potentially exacerbated existing reproductive health inequalities. These should be addressed in the post-pandemic period and beyond.

Access to and quality of sexual and reproductive health services in Britain during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative interview study of patient experiences.

INTRODUCTION: Access to quality sexual and reproductive health (SRH) services remains imperative even during a pandemic. Our objective was to understand experiences of delayed or unsuccessful access to SRH services in Britain during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: In October and November 2020 we conducted semi-structured telephone interviews with 14 women and six men reporting an unmet need for SRH services in the Natsal-COVID survey, a large-scale quasi-representative web-panel survey of sexual health and behaviour during COVID-19 (n=6654). We purposively sampled eligible participants using sociodemographic quotas. Inductive thematic analysis was used to explore service access and quality and to identify lessons for future SRH service delivery. RESULTS: Twenty participants discussed experiences spanning 10 SRH services including contraception and antenatal/maternity care. Participants reported hesitancy and self-censorship of need. Accessing telemedicine and 'socially-distanced' services required tenacity. Challenges included navigating changing information and procedures; perceptions of gatekeepers as obstructing access; and inflexible appointment systems. Concerns about reconfigured services included reduced privacy; decreased quality of interactions with professionals; reduced informal support; and fewer preventive SRH practices. However, some participants also described more streamlined services and staff efforts to compensate for disruptions. Many viewed positively the ongoing blending of telemedicine with in-person care. CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 pandemic impacted access and quality of SRH services. Participants' accounts revealed self-censorship of need, difficulty navigating shifting service configurations and perceived quality reductions. Telemedicine offers potential if intelligently combined with in-person care. We offer initial evidence-based recommendations for promoting an equitable restoration and future adaption of services.

Assessing the impact of online postal self-sampling for sexually transmitted infections on health inequalities, access to care and clinical outcomes in the UK: protocol for ASSIST, a realist evaluation.

INTRODUCTION: The past decade has seen a rapid increase in the volume and proportion of testing for sexually transmitted infections that are accessed via online postal self-sampling services in the UK. ASSIST (Assessing the impact of online postal self-sampling for sexually transmitted infections on health inequalities, access to care and clinical outcomes in the UK) aims to assess the impact of these services on health inequalities, access to care, and clinical and economic outcomes, and to identify the factors that influence the implementation and sustainability of these services. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: ASSIST is a mixed-methods, realist evaluated, national study with an in-depth focus of three case study areas (Birmingham, London and Sheffield). An impact evaluation, economic evaluation and implementation evaluation will be conducted. Findings from these evaluations will be analysed together to develop programme theories that explain the outcomes. Data collection includes quantitative data (using national, clinic based and online datasets); qualitative interviews with service users, healthcare professionals and key stakeholders; contextual observations and documentary analysis. STATA 17 and NVivo will be used to conduct the quantitative and qualitative analysis, respectively. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study has been approved by South Central - Berkshire Research Ethics Committee (ref: 21/SC/0223). All quantitative data accessed and collected will be anonymous. Participants involved with qualitative interviews will be asked for informed consent, and data collected will be anonymised.Our dissemination strategy has been developed to access and engage key audiences in a timely manner and findings will be disseminated via the study website, social media, in peer-reviewed scientific journals, at research conferences, local meetings and seminars and at a concluding dissemination and networking event for stakeholders.

Access to, usage and clinic outcomes of, online postal sexually transmitted infection services: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: There has been considerable expansion in online postal self-sampling (OPSS) STI services in many parts of the UK, driven by increasing demand on sexual health services and developments in diagnostics and digital health provision. This shift in service delivery has occurred against a backdrop of reduced funding and service fragmentation and the impact is unknown. We explored characteristics of people accessing and using OPSS services for STIs in the UK, the acceptability of these services and their impact on sexual health inequalities. METHODS: A scoping review was conducted of studies published in English-language based on pre-agreed inclusion/exclusion criteria, between 01 January 2010 and 07 July 2021. Nine databases were searched, and 23 studies that met the eligibility criteria were included. Studies were appraised using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. RESULTS: Study designs were heterogeneous, including quantitative, qualitative and mixed-methods analyses. The majority were either evaluating a single-site/self-sampling provider, exploratory or observational and of variable quality. Few studies collected comprehensive user demographic data. Individuals accessing OPSS tended to be asymptomatic, of white ethnicity, women, over 20 years and from less deprived areas. OPSS tended to increase overall STI testing demand and access, although return rates for blood samples were low, as was test positivity. There were varied results on whether services reduced time to treatment. OPSS services were acceptable to the majority of users. Qualitative studies showed the importance of trust, confidentiality, discretion, reliability, convenience and improved patient choice. CONCLUSION: OPSS services appear highly acceptable to users. However, uptake appears to be socially patterned and some groups who bear a disproportionate burden of poor sexual health in the UK are under-represented among users. Current provision of online self-sampling could widen health inequalities, particularly where other options for testing are limited. Work is needed to fully evaluate the impact and cost-effectiveness of OPSS services.

Measuring and evaluating sexual health in the era of digital health: challenges and opportunities.

Digital health has become increasingly embedded within sexual health service delivery and is now an established part of the user journey. It can support the provision of information and access to care across the sexual health continuum and facilitate the delivery of differentiated care with tailored and layered interventions that meet an individual's and target populations' need. However, despite advances in digital health, many challenges remain in the measurement and evaluation of sexual health. Reaching underserved populations, ensuring that both the intervention and the outcomes being measured are appropriate, and consistent collection of data (across settings and over time) are all potential obstacles to a full realisation of these opportunities. In order for digital health to improve sexual health and wellbeing, and reduce morbidity, the following need to occur: (1) ensure the necessary digital, health care, laboratory, legal and regulatory and surveillance infrastructure is in place to provide access to those with a sexual health need; (2) empowerment of end users and communities to take control of their own health through engagement in the development of interventions, and to ensure that outcomes of importance are measured; (3) tailoring and layering of interventions to provide equitable access to care; (4) integrating the digital ecosystem with the existing healthcare and external ecosystem; (5) measure and evaluate the unmet needs, gaps and quality of the experience, taking a realist evaluation approach; and (6) measure and evaluate the economic and distributional impacts associated with digital services or interventions in sexual health.

Priorities in the implementation of partner services for HIV/STIs in high-income nations: a narrative review of evidence and recommendations.

Partner notification (PN) remains a crucial prevention tool to reduce sexually transmitted infection (STI) transmission and prevent STI-related morbidity. Although there have been a variety of different approaches taken to facilitate the notification, testing and management of sexual contacts of STIs and HIV, there is an increasing acknowledgement that these interventions are unscalable and have relatively little impact on disease transmission. At the same time, an expanding body of evidence supports a shift in the emphasis of STI outreach-related work from an exclusive focus on PN to an approach that incorporates epidemiologic data collection, case management, and PN, an approach that is sometimes called partner services (PS). In this review, we appraise the current evidence base for different PN interventions for STIs in high-income nations, make recommendations for best practices, present a schema for how public health programs might prioritise PS for different programs, and identify priority research questions related to PN.

HIV PrEP: raise awareness in all groups who could benefit and provide for both on and offline access

In-person attendance enables holistic sexual health care including comprehensive sexually transmitted infection (STI) screening, renal monitoring, vaccination, and other risk reduction strategies. Rather than a sole focus on digital, we need to scale up PrEP coverage and engage a wider range of people with all HIV prevention tools to achieve HIV transmission elimination.89 Digital services play a key part in providing choice for people accessing PrEP but a degree of health and digital literacy are needed to use an online system safely.

Maintaining access to HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis in a pandemic: A service evaluation of telephone-based pre-exposure prophylaxis provision.

OBJECTIVES: The objective was to perform a survey-based service evaluation of our telephone PrEP clinic (Tele-PrEP), which was instituted during the COVID-19 pandemic, to inform future service delivery. METHODS: We administered parallel, web-based, anonymous surveys to PrEP-users who had a Tele-PrEP appointment between 13.11.2020 and 17.12.2020 and all healthcare professionals (HCPs) conducting Tele-PrEP clinics. We used descriptive statistics to summarise demographic and qualitative data, and thematically categorised free text responses using the Framework for a Systems Approach to Healthcare Delivery. RESULTS: 62/117 (53%) PrEP-users and 8/9 (89%) HCPs completed the surveys. Tele-PrEP was rated 'excellent' or 'good' by 61/62 (98%) PrEP-users. All HCPs felt that Tele-PrEP allowed them to assess patients safely and confidently. 10/62 (16%) PrEP-users and 1 (11%) HCP expressed a preference for face-to-face care. Using the Framework for a Systems Approach to Healthcare Delivery we identified key areas important to respondents who highlighted the rapid changes as a result of COVID-19, which required an increase in dedicated resources. HCPs valued teamwork, support/supervision and convenience in achieving quality care for the patient, who in turn, valued convenient, holistic and individualised management to meet their sexual healthcare needs. CONCLUSION: Tele-PrEP is feasible and acceptable. While most respondents rated the service highly, others identified a need/preference for face-to-face appointments.

Understanding the Barriers and Facilitators to Sharing Patient-Generated Health Data Using Digital Technology for People Living With Long-Term Health Conditions: A Narrative Review.

Using digital technology to share patient-generated health data has the potential to improve the self-management of multiple long-term health conditions. Sharing these data can allow patients to receive additional support from healthcare professionals and peer communities, as well as enhance their understanding of their own health. A deeper understanding of the concerns raised by those living with long-term health conditions when considering whether to share health data via digital technology may help to facilitate effective data sharing practices in the future. The aim of this review is to identify whether trust, identity, privacy and security concerns present barriers to the successful sharing of patient-generated data using digital technology by those living with long-term health conditions. We also address the impact of stigma on concerns surrounding sharing health data with others. Searches of CINAHL, PsychInfo and Web of Knowledge were conducted in December 2019 and again in October 2020 producing 2,581 results. An iterative review process resulted in a final dataset of 23 peer-reviewed articles. A thorough analysis of the selected articles found that issues surrounding trust, identity, privacy and security clearly present barriers to the sharing of patient-generated data across multiple sharing contexts. The presence of enacted stigma also acts as a barrier to sharing across multiple settings. We found that the majority of literature focuses on clinical settings with relatively little attention being given to sharing with third parties. Finally, we suggest the need for more solution-based research to overcome the discussed barriers to sharing.

Intimate physical contact between people from different households during the COVID-19 pandemic: a mixed-methods study from a large, quasi-representative survey (Natsal-COVID).

OBJECTIVES: Physical distancing as a non-pharmaceutical intervention aims to reduce interactions between people to prevent SARS-CoV-2 transmission. Intimate physical contact outside the household (IPCOH) may expand transmission networks by connecting households. We aimed to explore whether intimacy needs impacted adherence to physical distancing following lockdown in Britain in March 2020. METHODS: The Natsal-COVID web-panel survey (July-August 2020) used quota-sampling and weighting to achieve a quasi-representative population sample. We estimate reporting of IPCOH with a romantic/sexual partner in the 4 weeks prior to interview, describe the type of contact, identify demographic and behavioural factors associated with IPCOH and present age-adjusted ORs (aORs). Qualitative interviews (n=18) were conducted to understand the context, reasons and decision making around IPCOH. RESULTS: Of 6654 participants aged 18-59 years, 9.9% (95% CI 9.1% to 10.6%) reported IPCOH. IPCOH was highest in those aged 18-24 (17.7%), identifying as gay or lesbian (19.5%), and in steady non-cohabiting relationships (56.3%). IPCOH was associated with reporting risk behaviours (eg, condomless sex, higher alcohol consumption). IPCOH was less likely among those reporting bad/very bad health (aOR 0.54; 95% CI 0.32 to 0.93) but more likely among those with COVID-19 symptoms and/or diagnosis (aOR 1.34; 95% CI 1.10 to 1.65). Two-thirds (64.4%) of IPCOH was reported as being within a support bubble. Qualitative interviews found that people reporting IPCOH deliberated over, and made efforts to mitigate, the risks. CONCLUSIONS: Given 90% of people did not report IPCOH, this contact may not be a large additional contributor to SARS-CoV-2 transmission, although heterogeneity exists within the population. Public health messages need to recognise how single people and partners living apart balance sexual intimacy and relationship needs with adherence to control measures.

Initial impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on sexual and reproductive health service use and unmet need in Britain: findings from a quasi-representative survey (Natsal-COVID).

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has affected sexual and reproductive health (SRH) service use and unmet need, but the impact is unknown. We aimed to determine the proportion of participants reporting sexual risk behaviours, SRH service use and unmet need, and to assess remote sexually transmitted infection (STI) testing service use after the first national lockdown in Britain. METHODS: We used data from the National Surveys of Sexual Attitudes and Lifestyles (Natsal)-COVID cross-sectional, quasi-representative web survey (Natsal-COVID Wave 1). Adults aged 18-59 years who resided in England, Scotland, or Wales completed the survey between July 29 and Aug 10, 2020, which included questions about the approximate 4-month period after announcement of the initial lockdown in Britain (March 23, 2020). Quota-based sampling and weighting were used to achieve a quasi-representative population sample. Participants aged 45-59 years were excluded from services analysis due to low rates of SRH service use. Among individuals aged 18-44 years, we estimated reported SRH service use and inability to access, and calculated age-adjusted odds ratios (aORs) among sexually experienced individuals (those reporting any sexual partner in their lifetime) and sexually active individuals (those reporting any sexual partner in the past year). Unweighted denominators and weighted estimates are presented hereafter. FINDINGS: 6654 individuals had complete interviews and were included in the analysis. Among 3758 participants aged 18-44 years, 82·0% reported being sexually experienced, and 73·7% reported being sexually active. 20·8% of sexually experienced participants aged 18-44 years reported using SRH services in the 4-month period. Overall, 9·7% of 3108 participants (9·5% of men; 9·9% of women) reported being unable to use a service they needed, although of the participants who reported trying but not being able to use a SRH service at least once, 76·4% of participants also reported an instance of successful use. 5·9% of 1221 sexually active men and 3·6% of 1560 sexually active women reported use of STI-related services and 14·8% of 1728 sexually experienced women reported use of contraceptive services, with SRH service use highest among individuals aged 18-24 years. Sexually active participants reporting condomless sex with new partners since lockdown were much more likely to report using STI-related services than those who did not report condomless sex (aOR 23·8 [95% CI 11·6-48·9]) for men, 10·5 [3·9-28·2] for women) and, among men, were also more likely to have an unsuccessful attempt at STI-service use (aOR 13·3 [5·3-32·9]). Among 106 individuals who reported using STI testing services, 64·4% accessed services remotely (telephone, video, or online). Among 2581 women aged 25-59 years, 2·4% reported cervical screening compared with an estimated 6% in a comparable 4-month period before the pandemic. INTERPRETATION: Many people accessed SRH care during the initial lockdown; however, young people and those reporting sexual risk behaviours reported difficulties in accessing services and thus such services might need to address a backlog of need. FUNDING: Wellcome Trust, The Economic and Social Research Council, The National Institute for Health Research, Medical Research Council/Chief Scientist Office and Public Health Sciences Unit, and UCL Coronavirus Response Fund.

Impacts of COVID-19 on sexual behaviour in Britain: findings from a large, quasi-representative survey (Natsal-COVID).

OBJECTIVES: Physical restrictions imposed to combat COVID-19 dramatically altered sexual lifestyles but the specific impacts on sexual behaviour are still emerging. We investigated physical and virtual sexual activities, sexual frequency and satisfaction in the 4 months following lockdown in Britain in March 2020 and compared with pre-lockdown. METHODS: Weighted analyses of web panel survey data collected July/August 2020 from a quota-based sample of 6654 people aged 18-59 years in Britain. Multivariable regression took account of participants' opportunity for partnered sex, gender and age, to examine their independent associations with perceived changes in sexual frequency and satisfaction. RESULTS: Most participants (86.7%) reported some form of sex following lockdown with physical activities more commonly reported than virtual activities (83.7% vs 52.6%). Altogether, 63.2% reported sex with someone ('partnered sex') since lockdown, three-quarters of whom were in steady cohabiting relationships. With decreasing relationship formality, partnered sex was less frequently reported, while masturbation, sex toy use and virtual activities were more frequently reported. Around half of all participants perceived no change in partnered sex frequency compared with the 3 months pre-lockdown, but this was only one-third among those not cohabiting, who were more likely to report increases in non-partnered activities than those cohabiting. Two-thirds of participants perceived no change in sexual satisfaction; declines were more common among those not cohabiting. Relationship informality and younger age were independently associated with perceiving change, often declines, in sexual frequency and satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS: Our quasi-representative study of the British population found a substantial minority reported significant shifts in sexual repertoires, frequency and satisfaction following the introduction of COVID-19 restrictions. However, these negative changes were perceived by some more than others; predominantly those not cohabiting and the young. As these groups are most likely to experience adverse sexual health, it is important to monitor behaviour as restrictions ease to understand the longer term consequences, including for health services.

Acceptability of remote prescribing and postal delivery services for contraceptive pills and treatment of uncomplicated Chlamydia trachomatis.

OBJECTIVES: The digitalisation of sexual and reproductive health (SRH) services offers valuable opportunities to deliver contraceptive pills and chlamydia treatment by post. We aimed to examine the acceptability of remote prescribing and 'medication-by-post' in SRH. STUDY DESIGN: An online survey assessing attitudes towards remote management was distributed in three UK SRH clinics and via an integrated sexually transmitted infection (STI) postal self-sampling service. Logistic regressions were performed to identify potential correlates. RESULTS: There were 1281 participants (74% female and 49% <25 years old). Some 8% of participants reported having received medication via post and 83% were willing to receive chlamydia treatment and contraceptive pills by post. Lower acceptability was observed among participants who were: >45 years old (OR 0.43 (95% CI 0.23-0.81)), screened for STIs less than once annually (OR 0.63 (0.42-0.93)), concerned about confidentiality (OR 0.21 (0.90-0.50)), concerned about absence during delivery (OR 0.09 (0.02-0.32)) or unwilling to provide blood pressure readings (OR 0.22 (0.04-0.97)). Higher acceptability was observed among participants who reported: previously receiving medication by post (OR 4.63 (1.44-14.8)), preference for home delivery over clinic collection (OR 24.1 (11.1-51.9)), preference for home STI testing (OR 10.3 (6.16-17.4)), ability to communicate with health advisors (OR 4.01 (1.03-15.6)) and willingness to: register their real name (OR 3.09 (1.43-10.6)), complete online health questionnaires (OR 3.09 (1.43-10.6)) and use generic contraceptive pills (OR 2.88 (1.21-6.83)). CONCLUSIONS: Postal treatment and entering information online to allow remote prescribing were acceptable methods for SRH services and should be considered alongside medication collection in pharmacies. These methods could be particularly useful for patients facing barriers in accessing SRH. The cost-effectiveness and implementation of these novel methods of service delivery should be further investigated.

Risk factors, symptom reporting, healthcare-seeking behaviour and adherence to public health guidance: protocol for Virus Watch, a prospective community cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: The coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has caused significant global mortality and impacted lives around the world. Virus Watch aims to provide evidence on which public health approaches are most likely to be effective in reducing transmission and impact of the virus, and will investigate community incidence, symptom profiles and transmission of COVID-19 in relation to population movement and behaviours. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Virus Watch is a household community cohort study of acute respiratory infections in England and Wales and will run from June 2020 to August 2021. The study aims to recruit 50 000 people, including 12 500 from minority ethnic backgrounds, for an online survey cohort and monthly antibody testing using home fingerprick test kits. Nested within this larger study will be a subcohort of 10 000 individuals, including 3000 people from minority ethnic backgrounds. This cohort of 10 000 people will have full blood serology taken between October 2020 and January 2021 and repeat serology between May 2021 and August 2021. Participants will also post self-administered nasal swabs for PCR assays of SARS-CoV-2 and will follow one of three different PCR testing schedules based on symptoms. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study has been approved by the Hampstead National Health Service (NHS) Health Research Authority Ethics Committee (ethics approval number 20/HRA/2320). We are monitoring participant queries and using these to refine methodology where necessary, and are providing summaries and policy briefings of our preliminary findings to inform public health action by working through our partnerships with our study advisory group, Public Health England, NHS and government scientific advisory panels.

Patient-generated data in the management of HIV: a scoping review.

OBJECTIVES: Patient-generated data (PGData) are an emergent research area and may improve HIV care. The objectives of this scoping review were to synthesise, evaluate and make recommendations based on the available literature regarding PGData use in HIV care. DESIGN: Scoping review. DATA SOURCES: Embase, Medline, CINAHL Plus, Web of Science, Scopus, PsycINFO and Emcare databases. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Studies involving PGData use within HIV care for people living with HIV and/or healthcare professionals (HCPs) published before February 2021. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Data were extracted using a table and the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool was used to assess empirical rigour. We used thematic analysis to evaluate content. RESULTS: 11 articles met the eligibility criteria. Studies were observational, predominantly concerned hypothetical or novel digital platforms, mainly conducted in high-income settings, and had small sample sizes (range=10-160). There were multiple definitions of PGData. In the majority of studies (n=9), participants were people living with HIV, with a few studies including HCPs, informatics specialists or mixed participant groups. Participants living with HIV were aged 23-78 years, mostly men, of diverse ethnicities, and had low educational, health literacy and income levels.We identified four key themes: (1) Perceptions of PGData and associated digital platforms; (2) Opportunities; (3) Anticipated barriers and (4) Potential impact on patient-HCP relationships. CONCLUSIONS: Use of PGData within HIV care warrants further study, especially with regard to digital inequalities, data privacy and security. There is a need for longitudinal data on use within HIV in a variety of settings with a broad range of users, including impact on clinical outcomes. This will allow greater understanding of the role of PGData use in improving the health and well-being of people living with HIV, which is increasingly pertinent as digital healthcare becomes more widespread as a result of COVID-19.