Disrupted prevention: condom and contraception access and use among young adults during the initial months of the COVID-19 pandemic. An online survey.

BACKGROUND: The initial response to COVID-19 in the UK involved a rapid contraction of face-to-face sexual and reproductive health (SRH) services and widespread use of remote workarounds. This study sought to illuminate young people's experiences of accessing and using condoms and contraception in the early months of the pandemic. METHODS: We analysed data, including open-text responses, from an online survey conducted in June-July 2020 with a convenience sample of 2005 16-24-year-olds living in Scotland. RESULTS: Among those who used condoms and contraception, one quarter reported that COVID-19 mitigation measures had made a difference to their access or use. Open-text responses revealed a landscape of disrupted prevention, including changes to sexual risk-taking and preventive practices, unwanted contraceptive pathways, unmet need for sexually transmitted infection (STI) testing, and switches from freely provided to commercially sold condoms and contraception. Pandemic-related barriers to accessing free condoms and contraception included: (1) uncertainty about the legitimacy of accessing SRH care and self-censorship of need; (2) confusion about differences between SRH care and advice received from healthcare professionals during the pandemic compared with routine practice; and (3) exacerbation of existing access barriers, alongside reduced social support and resources to navigate SRH care. CONCLUSIONS: Emerging barriers to STI and pregnancy prevention within the context of COVID-19 have the potential to undermine positive SRH practices, and widen inequalities, among young people. As SRH services are restored amid evolving pandemic restrictions, messaging to support navigation of condom and contraception services should be co-created with young people.

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.

Acceptability of artificial intelligence (AI)-enabled chatbots, video consultations and live webchats as online platforms for sexual health advice.

OBJECTIVES: Sexual and reproductive health (SRH) services are undergoing a digital transformation. This study explored the acceptability of three digital services, (i) video consultations via Skype, (ii) live webchats with a health advisor and (iii) artificial intelligence (AI)-enabled chatbots, as potential platforms for SRH advice. METHODS: A pencil-and-paper 33-item survey was distributed in three clinics in Hampshire, UK for patients attending SRH services. Logistic regressions were performed to identify the correlates of acceptability. RESULTS: In total, 257 patients (57% women, 50% aged <25 years) completed the survey. As the first point of contact, 70% preferred face-to-face consultations, 17% telephone consultation, 10% webchats and 3% video consultations. Most would be willing to use video consultations (58%) and webchat facilities (73%) for ongoing care, but only 40% found AI chatbots acceptable. Younger age (<25 years) (OR 2.43, 95% CI 1.35 to 4.38), White ethnicity (OR 2.87, 95% CI 1.30 to 6.34), past sexually transmitted infection (STI) diagnosis (OR 2.05, 95% CI 1.07 to 3.95), self-reported STI symptoms (OR 0.58, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.97), smartphone ownership (OR 16.0, 95% CI 3.64 to 70.5) and the preference for a SRH smartphone application (OR 1.95, 95% CI 1.13 to 3.35) were associated with video consultations, webchats or chatbots acceptability. CONCLUSIONS: Although video consultations and webchat services appear acceptable, there is currently little support for SRH chatbots. The findings demonstrate a preference for human interaction in SRH services. Policymakers and intervention developers need to ensure that digital transformation is not only cost-effective but also acceptable to users, easily accessible and equitable to all populations using SRH services.