Humanizing an Invisible Population in India: Voices from Bisexual Men Concerning Identity, Life Experiences, and Sexual Health

Labor Pains: Work-Related Barriers to Access to Health Care for People Living with HIV in Hyderabad, India

To explore themes regarding work-related barriers to access to health care, we conducted 32 interviews, 16 with third gender people and 16 with cisgender women, all of whom were all living with HIV in Hyderabad, India. Most respondents were members of Dalit castes and had been living with HIV for several years at the time of the interview. Using thematic content analysis, interviews were coded by two researchers using a social determinants of health conceptual framework. Themes highlighted in this study include the burden of taking time off from work, the loss of pay associated with missing work, and the interruption of gendered care work responsibilities that respondents faced when seeking treatment. Findings from this study support the claim that equitable work policies and practices for marginalized laborers can increase access to medical care for people living with HIV.

A scoping review of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and intersex (LGBTQI+) people's health in India

Amid incremental progress in establishing an enabling legal and policy environment for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer-identified people, and people with intersex variations (LGBTQI+) in India, evidence gaps on LGBTQI+ health are of increasing concern. To that end, we conducted a scoping review to map and synthesize the current evidence base, identify research gaps, and provide recommendations for future research. We conducted a scoping review using the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology. We systematically searched 14 databases to identify peer-reviewed journal articles published in English language between January 1, 2010 and November 20, 2021, that reported empirical qualitative, quantitative or mixed methods data on LGBTQI+ people's health in India. Out of 3,003 results in total, we identified 177 eligible articles; 62% used quantitative, 31% qualitative, and 7% mixed methods. The majority (55%) focused on gay and other men who have sex with men (MSM), 16% transgender women, and 14% both of these populations; 4% focused on lesbian and bisexual women, and 2% on transmasculine people. Overall, studies reported high prevalence of HIV and sexually transmitted infections; multilevel risk factors for HIV; high levels of mental health burden linked to stigma, discrimination, and violence victimization; and non-availability of gender-affirmative medical care in government hospitals. Few longitudinal studies and intervention studies were identified. Findings suggest that LGBTQI+ health research in India needs to move beyond the predominant focus on HIV, and gay men/MSM and transgender women, to include mental health and non-communicable diseases, and individuals across the LGBTQI+ spectrum. Future research should build on largely descriptive studies to include explanatory and intervention studies, beyond urban to rural sites, and examine healthcare and service needs among LGBTQI+ people across the life course. Increased Indian government funding for LGBTQI+ health research, including dedicated support and training for early career researchers, is crucial to building a comprehensive and sustainable evidence base to inform targeted health policies and programs moving forward.

An eHealth Intervention for Promoting COVID-19 Knowledge and Protective Behaviors and Reducing Pandemic Distress Among Sexual and Gender Minorities: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial (#SafeHandsSafeHearts)

BACKGROUND

Existing data on COVID-19 disparities among vulnerable populations portend excess risk for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender (LGBT) and other persons outside of heteronormative and cisgender identities (ie, LGBT+). Owing to adverse social determinants of health, including pervasive HIV and sexual stigma, harassment, violence, barriers in access to health care, and existing health and mental health disparities, sexual and gender minorities in India and Thailand are at disproportionate risk for SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe disease. Despite global health disparities among LGBT+ populations, there is a lack of coordinated, community-engaged interventions to address the expected excess burden of COVID-19 and public health-recommended protective measures.

OBJECTIVE

We will implement a randomized controlled trial (RCT) to evaluate the effectiveness of a brief, peer-delivered eHealth intervention to increase COVID-19 knowledge and public health-recommended protective behaviors, and reduce psychological distress among LGBT+ people residing in Bangkok, Thailand, and Mumbai, India. Subsequent to the RCT, we will conduct exit interviews with purposively sampled subgroups, including those with no intervention effect.

METHODS

SafeHandsSafeHearts is a 2-site, parallel waitlist-controlled RCT to test the efficacy of a 3-session, peer counselor-delivered eHealth intervention based on motivational interviewing and psychoeducation. The study methods, online infrastructure, and content were pilot-tested with LGBT+ individuals in Toronto, Canada, before adaptation and rollout in the other contexts. The primary outcomes are COVID-19 knowledge (index based on US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC] items), protective behaviors (index based on World Health Organization and US CDC guidelines), depression (Patient Health Questionnaire-2), and anxiety (Generalized Anxiety Disorder-2). Secondary outcomes include loneliness, COVID-19 stress, and intended care-seeking. We will enroll 310 participants in each city aged 18 years and older. One-third of the participants will be cisgender gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men; one-third will be cisgender lesbian, bisexual, and other women who have sex with women; and one-third will be transfeminine, transmasculine, and gender nonbinary people. Participants will be equally stratified in the immediate intervention and waitlist control groups. Participants are mainly recruited from online social media accounts of community-based partner organizations. They can access the intervention on a computer, tablet, or mobile phone. SafeHandsSafeHearts involves 3 sessions delivered weekly over 3 successive weeks. Exit interviews will be conducted online with 3 subgroups (n=12 per group, n=36 in each city) of purposively selected participants to be informed by RCT outcomes and focal populations of concern.

RESULTS

The RCT was funded in 2020. The trials started recruitment as of August 1, 2021, and all RCT data collection will likely be completed by January 31, 2022.

CONCLUSIONS

The SafeHandsSafeHearts RCT will provide evidence about the effectiveness of a brief, peer-delivered eHealth intervention developed for LGBT+ populations amid the COVID-19 pandemic. If the intervention proves effective, it will provide a basis for future scale-up in India and Thailand, and other low- and middle-income countries.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04870723; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04870723.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

DERR1-10.2196/34381.

Awareness of and willingness to use pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) among people who inject drugs and men who have sex with men in India: Results from a multi-city cross-sectional survey

Introduction

Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is effective in reducing HIV transmission among key populations. In India, where PrEP is not currently part of the national HIV program, little is known about PrEP awareness, willingness to use PrEP, and barriers to uptake among people who inject drugs (PWID) and men who have sex with men (MSM).

Methods

We used respondent-driven sampling to accrue PWID and MSM in 22 sites from August 2016 to May 2017. Participants were asked about awareness of PrEP, willingness to use PrEP (following a brief description) and reasons why they might not be willing to use PrEP. Participants were also queried on preferences for PrEP delivery modality (oral vs. injectable). Multi-level logistic regression models were used to determine participant correlates of willingness to use PrEP. Estimates were weighted for the sampling method.

Results

A total of 10,538 PWID and 8,621 MSM who self-reported being HIV-negative were included in the analysis. Only 6.1% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 5.9, 6.3) of PWID and 8.0% of MSM (95% CI: 7.7, 8.4) were aware of PrEP. However, willingness to use PrEP was substantially higher in both groups: 52.4% of PWID and 67.6% of MSM. Participants commonly cited a perceived low risk for acquiring HIV infection, being perceived by others as being HIV-positive, and side effects as reasons why they would be unwilling to use PrEP. Among PWID, sharing needles and hazardous alcohol use were associated with increased willingness to use PrEP. Among MSM, having a main male partner and injection drug use were associated with increased willingness to use PrEP. Preference for daily oral or monthly injectable PrEP was similar among MSM (39.6%% vs. 41.7%,), while PWID were more likely to prefer oral to injectable administration routes (56.3% vs. 31.1%).

Conclusions

As India plans to roll-out of PrEP in the public sector, our multi-city survey of PWID and MSM highlights the need for key population-focused education campaigns about PrEP and self-assessment of risk.