The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on STI and HIV Services in the Netherlands According to Health Care Professionals.

Surveillance data from the Netherlands show that STI/HIV testing decreased at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, suggesting barriers to access to STI/HIV care. However, the impact of the pandemic on STI/HIV care may be more complex, and key populations could be differentially affected. The aim of this study was to gain more insight into the impact of COVID-19 on STI/HIV care in the Netherlands from the perspective of STI/HIV care providers. We investigated whether professionals in STI/HIV care experienced changes compared to pre-COVID in access to STI/HIV care for priority populations, demand and provision of STI/HIV care, shifts to online STI/HIV counseling and care, and the quality assurance of STI/HIV care. An online survey was completed by 192 STI/HIV care professionals. Additionally, semi-structured interviews were held with 23 STI/HIV care professionals. According to participants, people in vulnerable circumstances, such as recent migrants and people with low health or digital literacy, may have had difficulties accessing STI/HIV care during the pandemic, especially during lockdowns and at public sexual health services. Hence, these may not have received the care they needed. Participants thought that COVID-19 measures may have compounded existing disparities. Furthermore, participants found that online care provision was not up to standard and were concerned about follow-up care for patients using private online providers of remote tests. It is important to explore how STI/HIV care for people in vulnerable circumstances can be ensured in future public health crises.

A survey-based assessment of rates and covariates of mpox diagnosis and vaccination provides evidence to refine eligibility criteria for mpox vaccination among gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men in the Netherlands.

Background: The 2022 multicountry mpox outbreaks predominantly affected gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men (GBMSM) in non-endemic countries, including in the Netherlands. We conducted a survey-based assessment of the alignment between the risk factors associated with mpox diagnosis among GBMSM in the Netherlands and the eligibility criteria used in 2022 for vaccinating this group, with the aim to refine these criteria. Methods: An online self-report survey was conducted among adult GBMSM in the Netherlands between 29 July and 30 August 2022, corresponding to the first month of the Dutch mpox vaccination campaign. GBMSM were recruited via advertisements on social media and gay dating apps. Participants reported on their sexual behaviour, mpox diagnosis, and/or (initial) mpox vaccination since the start of the outbreak. Covariables of mpox diagnosis and vaccination were assessed using logistic regression analyses. Results: Of the 2,460 participants, 73 (3.0%, 95% CI 2.3-3.6%) were diagnosed with mpox and 485 (19.7%, 95% CI 18.1-21.3%) had received (initial) mpox vaccination. Using sample weighting, we estimated that, of the GBMSM population aged 18-80 years in the Netherlands, 1.1% (95% CI 0.7-1.6%) had been diagnosed with mpox and 7.8% (95% CI 6.8-8.9%) had received (initial) vaccination. HIV-PrEP use, living with HIV, reporting ≥20 sex partners in the past 12 months, and sex in sex venues/parties in the past 2 months were independent risk factors for mpox diagnosis. Except for sex in sex venues/parties, these variables were also independently associated with mpox vaccination. Conclusion: This study provides novel evidence regarding the degree to which the 2022 eligibility criteria for mpox vaccination align with the risk factors for mpox among GBMSM in the Netherlands. The findings contribute to a refinement of the eligibility criteria for mpox vaccination, to which sex in sex venues/parties should be added.

Availability and accessibility of HIV self-tests and self-sample kits at community pharmacies in the Netherlands.

BACKGROUND: In 2016 the WHO declared HIV self-testing and self-sampling an effective and safe test option that can reduce testing barriers. HIV self-tests and self-sampling kits (HIVST/HIVSS) are available for purchase at Dutch community pharmacies since 2019. We investigated the availability and accessibility of HIVST/HIVSS in community pharmacies, and factors associated with test availability. METHODS: An online survey among all Dutch community pharmacies (n = 1,987) was conducted between April and June 2021. Availability of HIVST/HIVSS and experiences of pharmacists with the test offer were analyzed with descriptive statistics. The association of pharmacy and pharmacists' characteristics with HIVST/HIVSS availability was explored by logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: In total, 465 pharmacists completed the questionnaire. Of the responding pharmacists, 6.2% (n = 29) offered HIVST/HIVSS. The majority (82.8%) sold between 0 and 20 tests per year. In total, pharmacies sold an estimated 370 HIVST/HIVSS per year. Pharmacies having HIVST/HIVSS available were less often located in moderately-urbanized to rural neighborhoods (OR 0.35, 95%CI 0.16-0.77 versus highly-urbanized), and were less often located in moderate-to-low SES neighborhoods (OR 0.40, 95%CI 0.18-0.88 versus high-SES). Reasons for not offering HIVST/HIVSS by pharmacists were no or little demand (69.3%), and not being familiar with these tests (17.4%). 52% of the pharmacists provided information about testing to test buyers. Reported options to improve the test offer were giving advice about (performing) the test to test buyers (72.4%), placing tests visible on the counter (51.7%), and advertisement (37.9%). CONCLUSION: HIVST/HIVSS have a limited practical availability in Dutch community pharmacies since their introduction in 2019, especially in lower-urbanized and lower-SES areas. Further research is needed to explore how to expand access to HIVST/HIVSS through community pharmacies in the Netherlands, and how to tailor it to the needs of pharmacy clients.

Where to go to in chlamydia control? From infection control towards infectious disease control.

OBJECTIVES: The clinical and public health relevance of widespread case finding by testing for asymptomatic chlamydia infections is under debate. We wanted to explore future directions for chlamydia control and generate insights that might guide for evidence-based strategies. In particular, we wanted to know the extent to which we should pursue testing for asymptomatic infections at both genital and extragenital sites. METHODS: We synthesised findings from published literature and from discussions among national and international chlamydia experts during an invitational workshop. We described changing perceptions in chlamydia control to inform the development of recommendations for future avenues for chlamydia control in the Netherlands. RESULTS: Despite implementing a range of interventions to control chlamydia, there is no practice-based evidence that population prevalence can be reduced by screening programmes or widespread opportunistic testing. There is limited evidence about the beneficial effect of testing on pelvic inflammatory disease prevention. The risk of tubal factor infertility resulting from chlamydia infection is low and evidence on the preventable fraction remains uncertain. Overdiagnosis and overtreatment with antibiotics for self-limiting and non-viable infections have contributed to antimicrobial resistance in other pathogens and may affect oral, anal and genital microbiota. These changing insights could affect the outcome of previous cost-effectiveness analysis. CONCLUSION: The balance between benefits and harms of widespread testing to detect asymptomatic chlamydia infections is changing. The opinion of our expert group deviates from the existing paradigm of 'test and treat' and suggests that future strategies should reduce, rather than expand, the role of widespread testing for asymptomatic chlamydia infections.

Evaluation and enumeration of online test providers for sexually transmitted infections, specifically chlamydia, in the Netherlands.

OBJECTIVES: Online testing for STIs might complement regular care provided by general practitioners or STI clinics. Two types of online testing can be distinguished, self-testing and self-sampling (sending sample to a laboratory for diagnosis). Online testing can occur without consultation with a healthcare professional, therefore information given by providers is essential for informed decision-making. We aimed to enumerate online test providers in the Netherlands focusing on chlamydia tests, to evaluate information using quality indicators and to gain insight on the proportion of online testing in the STI testing arena. METHODS: We performed a systematic internet search to identify online STI test providers. Twenty quality indicators were evaluated on their websites; indicator scores were weighted by level of importance (expert opinion). High scoring providers were recommended, on the condition that the sensitivity and specificity of the test were above 95% and providers included a follow-up procedure in case of a positive result. Finally, providers were contacted to inquire about the number of sold tests, positivity rates and demographic characteristics of testers. RESULTS: Five out of 12 identified self-sample test providers could be recommended, versus zero out of eight self-test providers. Self-sample test providers gave complete and correct information on more indicators (67%) compared with self-test providers (38%). In 2015, an estimated 30 000-40 000 self-sample tests were purchased, and 12 000-25 000 self-tests, which is roughly 10%-15% of the total number of STI tests. CONCLUSION: This evaluation shows that some online self-sample test providers could be put forward as way of STI testing complementing regular testing options. None of the self-test providers were recommended. Regularly evaluating online test providers is advised to improve quality of the information on the websites. Finally, self-testing might not be suited for all populations as most information is provided in written format only.

The first case record of a female patient with bubonic lymphogranuloma venereum (LGV), serovariant L2b.

Since 2003, a lymphogranuloma venereum epidemic has been reported in The Netherlands and other European countries. This epidemic is caused by Chlamydia trachomatis serovariant L2b and has only been seen in men having sex with men. The authors investigated a woman presenting with a bubo in her right groin. The authors showed by real-time PCR that the woman was infected with C trachomatis, serovariant L2b. This is the first reported case study of a female patient with bubonic lymphogranuloma venereum caused by serovariant L2b, which was probably contracted via her bisexual male partner.