Impact and acceptability of HIV self-testing for trans men and trans women: A mixed-methods subgroup analysis of the SELPHI randomised controlled trial and process evaluation in England and Wales

BACKGROUND

Globally, trans people are disproportionately affected by HIV, but research on strategies to increase testing are limited. SELPHI is a randomised-controlled-trial (RCT) of 10,135 cis men, trans men, and trans women reporting lifetime anal intercourse with male partners (cis or trans), evaluating whether the offer of free HIV self-testing (HIVST) increases diagnosis. This subgroup analysis from the SELPHI RCT aims to describe key HIVST outcomes and HIVST acceptability for trans people.

METHODS

SELPHI recruited using social networking and trans focused social media. Participants were randomised 60/40 to baseline HIVST (Biosure™) (BT) vs no baseline HIVST (nBT); and at 3-months (if completed the survey and reported recent CAI) 50/50 to 3-monthly HIVST (RT) vs no repeat HIVST (nRT). Outcomes were self-reported through online surveys. We conducted a qualitative study of semi-structured peer-led participant interviews (n = 20) exploring HIVST motivations and experiences. These were analysed using a framework approach.

FINDINGS

SELPHI recruited and randomised 118 trans men and trans women (94 trans men, 24 trans women), of whom 20 (16 trans men, 4 trans women) underwent the second randomisation. Median age at baseline was 29 (IQR: 22, 37), 79% were white, 79% were UK born, 37% had degree level education, and 31% had never tested for HIV. 62% (n = 59) of trans men completed the 3-month survey, but survey completion by trans women in nBT was too low (1/11) for randomised comparison. In trans men HIV testing uptake by 3 months was significantly higher in BT (95% 36/38) vs nBT (29%, 6/21) (RR=3.32 (1.68, 6.55) p<0.001). Trans people randomised to RT reported 3 times higher rate of HIV testing compared to nRT during the two-year follow-up (IRR 3.66 (1.86, 8.01) p<0.0001). STI testing frequency (mean number of tests during each 13 week period/ 2-year follow-up) was not significantly different across interventions: RT (0.03) and nRT (0.01) (IRR=1.86 95%CI; 0.77, 5.15; p = 0.15). Social harms were rare. Acceptability was very high in BT: 97% (38/39) found instructions easy to understand, 97% (37/38) found the HIVST simple to use and 100% (39/39) reported good overall experience. In interviews, reported HIVST benefits included increased autonomy, privacy, convenience and avoidance of health care providers perceived to be discriminatory and services that increased dysphoria. Minor lancet and test processing issues were reported.

INTERPRETATION

HIVST significantly increased testing uptake and frequency in trans men and trans people overall, although recruitment and retention of trans women was low. HIVST acceptability was high and indicates easy access to this novel technology may increase HIV testing access for this key population.

"PROUD to have been involved": an evaluation of participant and community involvement in the PROUD HIV prevention trial

BACKGROUND

The PROUD trial, a HIV prevention trial in men who have sex with men and trans women, set out to involve community representatives and trial participants in several ways. PROUD also aimed to evaluate participant involvement, to learn lessons and make recommendations for future clinical trials.

METHODS

Two structured surveys, one of participant and community representatives involved in the PROUD study, and the other of researchers from the PROUD team, were carried out in 2017. The results from the surveys were reviewed quantitatively and qualitatively, and themes emerging from the data identified and synthesised.

RESULTS

Survey invitations were sent to 88 involved participants, 11 community representatives and 10 researchers. The overall response rate was 55% (60/109). Overall, participants were younger than community representatives, and the majority were from Greater London. As expected, participants were predominantly involved in participant involvement meetings and community representatives in management committees.Participants and community representatives cited different motivations for getting involved in PROUD. Overall, participants were positive about their involvement; only two participants rated their experience unfavourably. Community representatives were also broadly positive. Most participants and all community representatives felt their involvement made a difference to the trial, themselves and / or the organisations they represented. However, some participant answers reflected the impact of participation in the trial rather than involvement in PPI activities.Researchers felt that PPI had positive impact across the entire trial cycle. Half felt they would have liked there to have been more PPI activity in PROUD. Researchers noted some challenges and recommendations for the future, including need for adequate funding, more engagement in PPI by all researchers, the need for PPI expertise to facilitate involvement activities and training and mentoring in PPI.

CONCLUSIONS

Involving clinical trial participants and wider community representatives as active partners in PPI is feasible and valuable in trials. Researchers are encouraged to consider and appropriately resource participant involvement and prospectively evaluate all PPI within their trials.

Exploring Mechanisms of Action: Using a Testing Typology to Understand Intervention Performance in an HIV Self-Testing RCT in England and Wales

SELPHI involves two interventions: A provides one HIV self-testing (HIVST) kit; B offers 3-monthly repeat HIVST kits if participants report ongoing risk. A logic model underpinned by the Behaviour Change Wheel informed the design of the intervention. SELPHI recruited 10,135 cis-men and trans people in England and Wales, all reporting anal sex with a man. This paper explores how the interventions were experienced and the mechanisms of action leading to impact for different groups of trial participants. In-depth interviews with 37 cis-men who have sex with men (MSM) were used to inductively categorise participants based on sexual and HIV testing histories. Themes relating to intervention experiences and impacts were mapped onto SELPHI-hypothesised intermediate outcomes to consider intervention impacts. Three groups were identified: ‘inexperienced testers’ engaged with SELPHI to overcome motivational and social and physical opportunity testing barriers. For ‘pro self-testers’, testing frequency was constrained by psychological and social barriers and lack of opportunity. ‘Opportunistic adopters’ engaged in HIVST for novelty and convenience. Perceived impacts for inexperienced testers were most closely aligned with the logic model, but for opportunistic adopters there was little evidence of impact. Distinctive groups were discernible with divergent intervention experiences. Using COM-B as a model for understanding behaviour change in relation to HIVST, our results indicate how HIVST interventions could be adapted to respond to different needs based on the target population’s demographic and behavioural features.

HIV self-testing intervention experiences and kit usability: results from a qualitative study among men who have sex with men in the SELPHI (Self-Testing Public Health Intervention) randomized controlled trial in England and Wales

Objectives

SELPHI (HIV Self‐Testing Public Health Intervention) is the largest randomized controlled trial (RCT) of HIV self‐testing (HIVST) in a high‐income setting to date, and has recruited 10 000 men who have sex with men (cis‐ and transgender) and transgender women who have sex with men. This qualitative substudy aimed to explore how those utilizing self‐tests experience HIVST and the implications for further intervention development and scale‐up. This is the first qualitative study in Europe investigating experiences of HIVST among intervention users, and the first globally examining the experience of using blood‐based HIVST.

Methods

Thirty‐seven cisgender MSM SELPHI participants from across England and Wales were purposively recruited to the substudy, in which semi‐structured interviews were used to explore testing history, HIVST experiences and intervention preferences. Interviews were audio‐recorded, transcribed and analysed through a framework analysis.

Results

Men accessed the intervention because HIVST reduced barriers related to convenience, stigma and privacy concerns. Emotional responses had direct links to acceptability. Supportive intervention components increased engagement with testing and addressed supportive concerns. HIVST facilitated more frequent testing, with the potential to reduce sexually transmitted infection (STI) screening frequency. Substudy participants with an HIV‐positive result (n = 2) linked to care promptly and reported very high acceptability. Minor adverse outcomes (n = 2; relationship discord and fainting) did not reduce acceptability. Ease of use difficulties were with the lancet and the test processing stage.

Conclusions

Intervention components shaped acceptability, particularly in relation to overcoming a perceived lack of support. The intervention was broadly acceptable and usable; participants expressed an unexpected degree of enthusiasm for HIVST, including those with HIV‐positive results and individuals with minor adverse outcomes.

Pilot phase of an internet-based RCT of HIVST targeting MSM and transgender people in England and Wales: advertising strategies and acceptability of the intervention

BACKGROUND

The SELPHI study (An HIV Self-Testing Public Health Intervention) is an online randomised controlled trial (RCT) of HIV self-testing (HIVST). The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility of recruiting UK men who have sex with men (cis and trans) and trans women who have sex with men to the SELPHI pilot, and the acceptability of the HIVST intervention used among those randomised to receive a kit.

METHODS

A mixed-methods approach to assessing trial feasibility and intervention acceptability was taken, using quantitative data from advertising sources and RCT surveys alongside qualitative data from a nested sub-study.

RESULTS

Online recruitment and intervention delivery was feasible. The recruitment strategy led to the registration of 1370 participants of whom 76% (1035) successfully enrolled and were randomised 60/40 to baseline testing vs no baseline testing. Advertising platforms performed variably. Reported HIVST kit use increased from 83% at two weeks to 96% at three months. Acceptability was very high across all quantitative measures. Participants described the instructions as easy to use, and the testing process as simple. The support structures in SELPHI were felt to be adequate. Described emotional responses to HIVST varied.

CONCLUSIONS

Recruiting to a modest sized HIVST pilot RCT is feasible, and the recruitment, intervention and HIVST kit were acceptable. Research on support needs of individuals with reactive results is warranted.

Protocol, rationale and design of SELPHI: a randomised controlled trial assessing whether offering free HIV self-testing kits via the internet increases the rate of HIV diagnosis

BACKGROUND

Among men who have sex with men (MSM) in the UK, an estimated 28% have never tested for HIV and only 27% of those at higher risk test at least every 6 months. HIV self-testing (HIVST), where the person takes their own blood/saliva sample and processes it themselves, offers the opportunity to remove many structural and social barriers to testing. Although several randomised controlled trials are assessing the impact of providing HIVST on rates of HIV testing, none are addressing whether this results in increased rates of HIV diagnoses that link to clinical care. Linking to care is the critical outcome because it is the only way to access antiretroviral treatment (ART). We describe here the design of a large, internet-based randomised controlled trial of HIVST, called SELPHI, which aims to inform this key question.

METHODS/DESIGN

The SELPHI study, which is ongoing is promoted via social networking website and app advertising, and aims to enroll HIV negative men, trans men and trans women, aged over 16 years, who are living in England and Wales. Apart from the physical delivery of the test kits, all trial processes, including recruitment, take place online. In a two-stage randomisation, participants are first randomised (3:2) to receive a free baseline HIVST or no free baseline HIVST. At 3 months, participants allocated to receive a baseline HIVST (and meeting further eligibility criteria) are subsequently randomised (1:1) to receive the offer of regular (every 3 months) free HIVST, with testing reminders, versus no such offer. The primary outcome from both randomisations is a laboratory-confirmed HIV diagnosis, ascertained via linkage to a national HIV surveillance database.

DISCUSSION

SELPHI will provide the first reliable evidence on whether offering free HIVST via the internet increases rates of confirmed HIV diagnoses and linkage to clinical care. The two randomisations reflect the dual objectives of detecting prevalent infections (possibly long-standing) and the more rapid diagnosis of incident HIV infections. It is anticipated that the results of SELPHI will inform future access to HIV self-testing provision in the UK.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

DOI 10.1186/ISRCTN20312003 registered 24/10/2016.

UK guideline for the use of HIV Post-Exposure Prophylaxis Following Sexual Exposure, 2015

We present the updated British Association for Sexual Health and HIV guidelines for HIV post-exposure prophylaxis following sexual exposure (PEPSE). This document includes a review of the current data to support the use of PEPSE, considers how to calculate the risks of infection after a potential exposure, and provides recommendations on when PEPSE should and should not be considered. We also review which medications to use for PEPSE, provide a checklist for initial assessment, and make recommendations for monitoring individuals receiving PEPSE. Special scenarios, cost-effectiveness of PEPSE, and issues relating to service provision are also discussed. Throughout the document, the place of PEPSE within the broader context of other HIV prevention strategies is considered.

What we can't see? Understanding the representations and meanings of UAI, barebacking, and semen exchange in gay male pornography

Since the late 1990s, the use of condoms within gay male pornography has been on the wane. Moving from a niche category into more mainstream forms of commercial pornography, unprotected anal sex has become a dominant theme within this sphere of gay male sexual representation. However, while the definition of what constitutes bareback pornography may at first sight appear unproblematic, this article argues that meanings and understandings of unprotected anal intercourse (UAI) are not constant across all genres of gay male pornography. Using textual analysis and focus group methods, the authors demonstrate how subcultural understandings of UAI are dependent on a variety of textual factors. These include the age, body type, and racial identities of the performers; the setting, context, and mise-en-scène of the pornographic scene; and the deployment of power relations between the insertive and receptive partners. The article concludes by suggesting that the recognition of the diverse representations of "barebacking" found in contemporary gay male pornography should influence the ways in which health promotion strategies address discussions of UAI and bareback pornography.