Community HIV testing for men who have sex with men: results of a pilot project and comparison of service users with those testing in genitourinary medicine clinics.

Results of a community HIV testing pilot (fasTest) targeting men who have sex with men (MSM) in Brighton are reported and service users are compared with those testing in genitourinary medicine (GUM) clinics. FasTest offers rapid HIV testing in a weekly evening drop-in session staffed by GUM professionals in a community organisation. It was prospectively evaluated from November 2004 to March 2006 using a self-completed paper questionnaire assessing demographics, previous use of GUM, HIV testing history and sexual behaviour. Follow-up through GUM/HIV services was monitored. A simplified questionnaire was completed by MSM accessing the GUM clinic over the same time period. Men were included in the analysis if they identified as gay or bisexual or had recent sex with a man, tested for HIV and received a result. In both the fastest and GUM groups, men reported high rates of unprotected anal sex in the last 3 months. fasTest clients were significantly younger and less likely to test positive for HIV. This difference was independent of age and HIV testing history. There was no difference in rates of recent infection between the two. We conclude that community HIV testing is feasible and reaches the target group of high risk MSM.

Risky sexual behaviour in context: qualitative results from an investigation into risk factors for seroconversion among gay men who test for HIV.

OBJECTIVES: The INSIGHT case-control study confirmed that HIV serodiscordant unprotected anal intercourse (SdUAI) remains the primary risk factor for HIV infection in gay men in England. This paper uses qualitative follow-up data to examine the contexts of SdUAI and other risk factors among the case-control study participants. METHODS: In-depth interviews were conducted with 26 recent HIV seroconverters and 22 non-converters. Purposive selection was used to provide diversity in demographics and sexual behaviour and to facilitate exploration of risk factors identified in the case-control study. RESULTS: Condoms were perceived as barriers to intimacy, trust and spontaneity. The potential consequences of the loss of these were traded off against the consequences of HIV infection. Previous negative HIV tests and the adoption of risk reduction strategies diminished the perceived threat of HIV infection, supporting beliefs that HIV was something that happened to others. Depression and low self-esteem, often combined with use of alcohol or other drugs, led to further risk taking and loss of control over risk reduction strategies. CONCLUSIONS: A range of psychosocial reasons led some men to engage in UAI with serodiscordant or unknown partners, despite high levels of risk awareness. Men in their mid-life, those in serodiscordant relationships and men that had experienced bereavement or other significant, negative, life events revealed factors related to these circumstances that contributed to increases in risky UAI. A diverse portfolio of interventions is required to build confidence and control over safer sex practices that are responsive to gay men's wider emotional needs.