Search

Background: The disclosure of HIV status and pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) use can be important in the negotiation of safe sex. With the rapid uptake of PrEP in Australia, norms and expectations about discussion and disclosure may have changed., Methods: We explored the disclosure of PrEP use, HIV status and communication with sex partners by HIV-negative gay men in Sydney, Australia. We conducted semi-structured interviews from October 2017 to May 2018 and analysed data using a codebook thematic analysis approach., Results: Participants had a variety of expectations of what they should tell their partners and what they expected in return. For some participants, PrEP had negated the need for any discussion about HIV. Many participants assumed their partners would find information about their HIV status or PrEP use on their online profiles or that partners would ask, if necessary., Conclusions: Building a stronger, shared understanding among gay men that disclosure and discussion no longer automatically occur before sexual encounters may be useful.

Relationship agreements are important for HIV prevention among gay and bisexual men (GBM) in relationships, with research earlier in the HIV epidemic often finding that agreements specified monogamy or condom use with casual partners. There is evidence that HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) has shifted sexual practices among some men in relationships, such as allowing condomless sex with casual partners, but there has been little attention paid to relationship agreements among GBM who use PrEP. In this paper, we analyzed national, Australian, cross-sectional data from an online survey completed by non-HIV-positive GBM in 2021 (N = 1,185). Using logistic regression, we identified demographic characteristics, sexual practices and the types of relationship agreement that were associated with PrEP use among GBM in relationships. Using Pearson's chi-squared tests, we explored whether PrEP users in relationships reported similar sexual practices to PrEP users not in relationships. PrEP use among GBM in relationships was independently associated with older age, identifying as gay, being in a non-monogamous relationship, having a spoken (explicit) relationship agreement, having a primary HIV-negative partner taking PrEP or a primary partner living with HIV, reporting recent condomless casual sex, reporting an STI diagnosis in the past year, and knowing at least one other PrEP user. We found that PrEP users in relationships had similar sexual practices to PrEP users not in relationships. GBM in relationships who have casual sex and who meet PrEP suitability criteria may be good candidates for PrEP. Our findings suggest that explicit relationship agreements remain important for HIV prevention, and they support PrEP use among GBM in relationships., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Condoms have been the primary form of HIV prevention for gay and bisexual men (GBM) for most of the HIV epidemic. The introduction of biomedical HIV prevention may have changed attitudes towards condoms. Data from repeated national online surveys of GBM in Australia were used to examine how attitudes towards condoms and confidence discussing condoms with partners changed in the period 2011-2019. The proportion of all participants who reported a positive experience in using condoms remained low and unchanged (9.6% in 2011 to 6.0% in 2019). Confidence in discussing condoms with partners decreased over time (from 72.2% in 2011 to 56.6% in 2019). Confidence in discussing condoms was associated with concern about sexually transmitted infections, and more consistent condom use. Sustaining confidence in using condoms may be more challenging as biomedical prevention methods become more commonly used.

Minority groups may face additional barriers to vaccination. In April-June 2021, we assessed the level of COVID-19 vaccination and willingness to be vaccinated in a national, online survey of 1280 gay and bisexual men in Australia. Over a quarter of the sample (28.0%) had been partially or fully vaccinated, and 80.0% of the unvaccinated were willing to be vaccinated. Vaccination was independently associated with older age, being university educated, and HIV status (with HIV-positive participants being more likely and untested participants less likely to be vaccinated). Willingness to be vaccinated was independently associated with living in a capital city and being university educated. Those who had lost income or their job due to COVID-19 were less willing to be vaccinated. Our results suggest encouraging COVID-19 vaccination among those with lower levels of health literacy and supporting those who have experienced financial stress because of the pandemic., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Despite an increase in the range of effective HIV risk reduction strategies that are available, some gay and bisexual men (GBM) do not use any of them consistently. Understanding why GBM do not always use a protective strategy may help develop more effective responses. Semi-structured interviews with 24 sexually active GBM in Sydney, Australia were conducted and analyzed using thematic analysis. The main characteristics of encounters featuring little or no use of HIV risk reduction strategies were familiarity and trust with partners, pleasure and intoxication, expectations that partners were using HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis or treatment as prevention, and in some cases feelings of inevitability about acquiring HIV. An increase in pleasure and a reduction in anxiety about sex were noted by some GBM who had commenced PrEP. Encouraging GBM to adopt a strategy such as PrEP and to use it consistently may be easier by emphasizing benefits to mental health and the quality of sex and intimacy it can offer. However, even with the increased availability of effective biomedical HIV risk reduction strategies, not all GBM are able to consistently manage HIV risk and some continue to hold optimistic and potentially inaccurate beliefs about sexual partners that may increase HIV risk., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Background: We assessed willingness to use HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) and current PrEP use among gay and bisexual men (GBM) in Australia., Methods: National, online cross-sectional surveys of GBM were conducted in 2013, 2015, 2017, and 2019. Willingness to use PrEP was measured on a previously validated scale. Trends and associations with key measures were analyzed using multivariate logistic regression., Results: During 2013-2019, 4908 surveys were completed. Among HIV-negative and untested men not currently using PrEP, willingness to use PrEP increased from 23.0% in 2013 to 36.5% in 2017 (P < 0.001) but then plateaued at 32% in 2019 (P = 0.13). The proportion of current PrEP users increased significantly from 2.5% in 2015 to 38.5% in 2019 (P < 0.001). In 2019, factors independently associated with being a current PrEP user (compared with non-PrEP users who were willing to use PrEP) included having subsidized health care (Medicare), knowing HIV-positive people, being recently diagnosed with an STI other than HIV, having higher numbers of recent male sexual partners, recent condomless sex with casual and regular partners, and frequent PrEP sorting., Conclusion: Willingness to use PrEP has plateaued as its use has rapidly increased among GBM in Australia. PrEP use is concentrated among more sexually active men with access to subsidized health care. Free or low cost access schemes may facilitate broader access among GBM who want or need PrEP but lack access to subsidized health care., Competing Interests: The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose., (Copyright © 2020 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

We have tracked belief in the effectiveness of HIV treatment as prevention (TasP) among Australian gay and bisexual men (GBM) since 2013. National, online cross-sectional surveys of GBM were conducted every 2 years during 2013-2019. Trends and associations were analyzed using multivariate logistic regression. Data from 4,903 survey responses were included. Belief that HIV treatment prevents transmission increased from 2.6% in 2013 to 34.6% in 2019. Belief in the effectiveness of TasP was consistently higher among HIV-positive participants than other participants. In 2019, higher levels of belief in TasP were independently associated with university education, being HIV-positive, using pre-exposure prophylaxis, knowing more HIV-positive people, being recently diagnosed with a sexually transmitted infection (STI) and use of post-exposure prophylaxis. Belief that HIV treatment prevents transmission has increased substantially among Australian GBM, but remains concentrated among HIV-positive GBM, those who know HIV-positive people, and GBM who use antiretroviral-based prevention.

Purpose: To understand the characteristics of a minority of Australian gay and bisexual men (GBM) who, despite an increase in the number and availability of HIV risk reduction strategies, do not consistently use a strategy to protect themselves from HIV., Methods: This analysis is based on data from 2,920 participants in a national, online, prospective observational cohort study. GBM who never or rarely used HIV risk reduction strategies (NRR) were compared with two groups using multivariate logistic regression: i) GBM using pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) and ii) GBM frequently using risk reduction strategies (FRR) other than PrEP., Results: Compared to PrEP users, NRR men were younger (p<0.0001), less socially engaged with gay men (p<0.0001) and less likely to have completed a postgraduate (p<0.05) or undergraduate degree (p<0.05). They were also less likely to have recently used amyl nitrite (p<0.05), erectile dysfunction medication (p<0.05) and cocaine (p<0.05) in the previous 6 months. Compared with FRR men, NRR men were less likely to have completed a postgraduate (p<0.0001) or undergraduate degree (p<0.05), scored higher on the sexual sensation-seeking scale (p<0.0001) and were more likely to identify as versatile (p<0.05), a bottom (p<0.05) or very much a bottom (p<0.05) during anal sex., Conclusions: NRR men were largely similar to other Australian GBM. However, our analysis suggests it may be appropriate to focus HIV prevention interventions on younger, less socially engaged and less educated GBM, as well as men who prefer receptive anal intercourse to promote the use of effective HIV risk reduction strategies., Competing Interests: No competing financial interests exist.

Background: HIV prevention cascades can assist in monitoring the implementation of prevention methods like preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP). We developed 2 PrEP cascades for Australia's primary HIV-affected population, gay and bisexual men., Methods: Data were drawn from 2 national, repeated, cross-sectional surveys (the Gay Community Periodic Surveys and PrEPARE Project). One cascade had 3 steps, and the other had 7 steps. Trends over time were assessed using logistic regression. For the most recent year, we identified the biggest drop between steps in each cascade and compared the characteristics of men between the 2 steps using multivariate logistic regression., Results: Thirty-nine thousand six hundred and seventy non-HIV-positive men participated in the Periodic Surveys during 2014-2018. PrEP eligibility increased from 28.1% (1901/6762) in 2014 to 37.3% (2935/7878) in 2018 (P < 0.001), awareness increased from 29.6% (563/1901) to 87.1% (2555/2935; P < 0.001), and PrEP use increased from 3.7% (21/563) to 45.2% (1155/2555; P < 0.001). Of 1038 non-HIV-positive men in the PrEPARE Project in 2017, 54.2% (n = 563) were eligible for PrEP, 97.2% (547/563) were aware, 67.6% (370/547) were willing to use PrEP, 73.5% (272/370) had discussed PrEP with a doctor, 78.3% (213/272) were using PrEP, 97.2% (207/213) had recently tested, and 75.8% (157/207) reported reduced HIV concern and increased pleasure because of PrEP. The break point analyses indicated that PrEP coverage was affected by geographical availability, education level, employment, and willingness to use PrEP., Conclusions: PrEP eligibility, awareness, and use have rapidly increased among Australian gay and bisexual men. The cascades identify disparities in uptake by eligible men as a result of socioeconomic factors and PrEP's acceptability.

Using repeated, national, online, cross-sectional surveys of Australian gay and bisexual men (GBM), we analysed trends related to HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP). Specifically, we analysed trends in PrEP use, willingness to use PrEP, and concern about using PrEP during 2011-2017. We assessed support for GBM using PrEP and willingness to have sex with men taking PrEP between 2015 and 2017. For time-based analyses, we used multivariate logistic regression, controlling for sampling variations over time. We constructed new scales assessing reduced concern about HIV among PrEP users and non-users in 2017, and used multivariate logistic regression to identify independent correlates of PrEP use (vs. non-use). The analyses included 4567 HIV-negative and untested participants (2011-2017). PrEP use increased from 0.5% in 2011 to 25.5% in 2017 (p < 0.001). Willingness to use PrEP increased from 27.9% in 2011 to 36.5% in 2017 (p < 0.001) while concern about using PrEP fell (52.1-36.1%, p < 0.001). Support for GBM using PrEP remained stable (52.5% in 2015, 51.9% in 2017, p = 0.62), and willingness to have sex with men taking PrEP increased from 34.9% in 2015 to 49.0% in 2017 (p < 0.001). In 2017, 22.8% of non-PrEP-users had reduced HIV concern because of PrEP, while 73.6% of PrEP users had reduced HIV concern and greater sexual pleasure because of PrEP. The analysis of PrEP users vs. non-users in 2017 indicated that PrEP users were more sexually active and reported higher risk sexual practices, were more likely to live in New South Wales and Victoria, and to be in full-time employment. They were also more likely to know HIV-positive people and other PrEP users. Diffusion of Innovations theory suggests that future PrEP users in Australia may be less adventurous and require greater reassurance about PrEP's efficacy and legitimacy, to sustain rollout and address current disparities in uptake.

Introduction and Aims: Lesbian, bisexual and queer (LBQ) women in Australia and internationally are smoking at least twice the rate of women in the general population. An understanding of smoking behaviours in this population is essential in order to develop effective interventions. Our analysis aimed to investigate differences in smoking patterns and contexts of smoking between current smokers and recent quitters (<2 years to 1 month)., Design and Methods: Data were collected through an online anonymous survey conducted in mid-2015. Participants were recruited online from a variety of social networking sites and community-based mailing groups., Results: Overall 257 lesbian, bisexual and queer women completed the survey, 73% current smokers and 27% recent quitters; nearly all had smoked daily at some point in their lives. Multivariate analysis showed recent quitters were less likely to have some (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.19, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.05-0.71) or half/most/all (aOR 0.12, 95% CI 0.03-0.048) close friends who smoked compared to none, and were more likely to have a non-smoking (aOR 10.2, 95% CI 3.86-27.0) or no regular partner (aOR 4.01, 95% CI 1.47-10.9) than one who smoked. Non-Anglo-Australian women were also more likely to be recent quitters (aOR 2.45 [95% CI 1.10-5.42]) than Anglo-Australian women., Discussion and Conclusions: Understanding the social significance of partners and friends in lesbian, bisexual and queer women's smoking and cessation efforts will be important for developing meaningful, effective and targeted interventions to address the persistent high rates of smoking in this population., (© 2018 Australasian Professional Society on Alcohol and other Drugs.)

We investigated the racial or ethnic partner preferences among Australian gay and bisexual men (GBM) as part of a large study of sexual preferences among GBM, to identify whether racial bias was a factor in how GBM expressed their partner preferences. We surveyed 1853 Australian GBM about their partner preferences and preferred sex practices. We used logistic regression to identify whether factors such as age, gay social engagement, or men's own ethnicity or race were associated with ethnic and racial partner preferences. Mean age was 34.8 years. Ethnic or racial background included: white or "Caucasian" (86.6%), Australian Aboriginal (2.7%), and Asian (6.6%). Mean attraction scores were highest for "Caucasian" men, and lowest for Aboriginal and Asian men. Under half (41.6%) were attracted to all racial or ethnic types; 7.7% were only attracted to "Caucasian" men. Being older and lower homonegativity scores were independently associated with finding all ethnic and racial types attractive. Being attracted only to "Caucasian" men was associated with younger age. Mental health was not associated with ethnic or racial partner preferences. Although men more commonly found most racial or ethnic types attractive, racial biases in partner selection were more evident among younger men, and among those who were less comfortable with their own sexuality. Addressing anti-gay stigma and broader exposure to gay community subcultures may be as important in countering racial bias.

Background: Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) has been rapidly rolled out in large, publicly funded implementation projects in Victoria and New South Wales, Australia. Using behavioural surveillance of gay and bisexual men, we analysed the uptake and effect of PrEP, particularly on condom use by gay and bisexual men not using PrEP., Methods: We collected data from the Melbourne and Sydney Gay Community Periodic Surveys (GCPS), cross-sectional surveys of adult gay and bisexual men in Melbourne, VIC, and Sydney, NSW. Recruitment occurred at gay venues or events and online. Eligible participants were 18 years or older (face-to-face recruitment) or 16 years or older (online recruitment), identified as male (including transgender participants who identified as male); and having had sex with a man in the past 5 years or identified as gay or bisexual, or both. Using multivariate logistic regression, we assessed trends in condom use, condomless anal intercourse with casual partners (CAIC), and PrEP use by gay and bisexual men, controlling for sample variation over time., Findings: Between Jan 1, 2013, and March 31, 2017, 27 011 participants completed questionnaires in the Melbourne (n=13 051) and Sydney (n=13 960) GCPS. 16 827 reported sex with casual male partners in the 6 months before survey and were included in these analyses. In 2013, 26 (1%) of 2692 men reported CAIC and were HIV-negative and using PrEP, compared with 167 (5%) of 3660 men in 2016 and 652 (16%) of 4018 men in 2017 (p<0·0001). Consistent condom use was reported by 1360 (46%) of 2692 men in 2013, 1523 (42%) of 3660 men in 2016, and 1229 (31%) of 4018 men in 2017 (p<0·0001). In 2013, 800 (30%) of 2692 men who were HIV-negative or untested and not on PrEP reported CAIC, compared with 1118 (31%) of 3660 men in 2016, and 1166 (29%) of 4018 in 2017 (non-significant trend)., Interpretation: A rapid increase in PrEP use by gay and bisexual men in Melbourne and Sydney was accompanied by an equally rapid decrease in consistent condom use. Other jurisdictions should consider the potential for community-level increases in CAIC when modelling the introduction of PrEP and in monitoring its effect., Funding: Australian Government Department of Health, Victorian Department of Health and Human Services, and New South Wales Ministry of Health., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Rates of drug use remain substantially higher among gay and bisexual men (GBM) and people living with HIV (PLHIV) in Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. The use of drugs to enhance sexual pleasure within cultures of Party and Play creates opportunities to discuss sexual health, mental health, consent and wellbeing. Community organisations with a history of HIV prevention, care, treatment are well-placed to respond. ACON's (formerly the AIDS Council of New South Wales) multi-dimensional response to 'chemsex' includes: direct client services support for individuals seeking to manage or reduce their use; health promotion activities that support peer education; partnerships with research institutions to better understand cultures of chemsex; and policy submissions that call for drug use to be approached as a health, rather than a criminal, issue. The approach speaks the language of Party and Play subcultures; employs culturally relevant terminology and imagery; uses content designed, created and delivered by peers; and operates within a pleasure-positive, harm-reduction and community-led framework. These interventions have led to increased service uptake, strong community engagement, robust research partnerships and the recognition of GBM as a priority population in relevant strategies.

This study examines partner abuse in LBGTI relationships, with focus on the associations with emotional distress and protective factors. Two hundred and eighty-seven participants took part. Partner abuse (victimisation) comprised three factors; conflict orientated aggression; hostile ignorance and control of communication; and social control and possessiveness (including threats to possessions). Perpetration factors were similar. Significant differences across sexuality or gender were limited to the perpetration of abuse relating to suspicion and possessiveness, where men were more likely to report this than the other gender groups, and women were less likely to report this. Of those reporting abuse in their current relationship, over half reported experiencing abuse in a primary relationship previously, with 60% reporting exposure to abuse as a child. Partner abuse in their current relationship predicted current levels of increased emotional distress, with reduced satisfaction with the current relationship having an indirect impact on this association. Resilience traits were not a predictor or mediator. The results demonstrate the similarity in abuse across LGBTI communities despite the diversity of genders, sexualities and experiences within these groups. The results are discussed with regard to directions for future research and implications for practice., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Assess willingness to use HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP), support for others using it and willingness to have sex with partners using PrEP among Australian gay and bisexual men (GBM)., Methods: National, online cross-sectional surveys of Australian GBM were conducted in 2011, 2013 and 2015. Scales measuring support for and willingness to have sex with men using PrEP were developed in 2015 using factor analysis. Trends and associations with key measures were analysed using multivariate logistic regression., Results: During 2011-2015, 3850 surveys were completed by GBM. Willingness to use PrEP among HIV-negative and untested men did not change between 2011 (28.2%) and 2015 (31.7%, p=0.13). In 2015, willingness to use PrEP was independently associated with younger age, having an HIV-positive regular partner, recent condomless anal intercourse with casual male partners (CAIC), more than 10 male sex partners in the previous 6 months, ever having taken postexposure prophylaxis and having fewer concerns about using PrEP. In 2015, 54.5% of GBM supported other GBM taking PrEP and 39% were willing to have sex with men using PrEP. Support for and willingness to have sex with PrEP users were both associated with being HIV-positive, having a university degree and having two or more male partners in the previous 6 months. Willingness to have sex with men on PrEP was also associated with recent CAIC and using party drugs for sex, but was less likely among men who consistently used or had a positive experience using condoms., Discussion: Interest in and support for using PrEP are concentrated among men who engage in higher risk practices and who know more about living with HIV. This is consistent with the targeting of PrEP in Australia., Competing Interests: Competing interests: This work was supported with grants from the Bloodborne virus and sexually transmissible infection Research, Intervention and Strategic Evaluation programme, funded by the New South Wales Ministry of Health, and the Australian Government Department of Health. Non-financial support from Gilead Sciences was received for studies outside the submitted work., (Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/.)

Background: How gay and bisexual men (GBM) establish partnership agreements may be affected by several factors, including age. The ability to communicate with a partner about sexual agreements has important sexual health implications for GBM., Objective: To assess differences in partnership agreements among GBM., Methods: We surveyed GBM about their partnerships using a national, anonymous online survey in 2013-14. We compared men who had monogamous partnerships with men who had non-monogamous partnerships, according to age and other factors., Results: Regarding the nature of their partnership with their primary regular partner (PRP), younger men were less likely to have an agreement of any sort and were less likely to have discussed it. Younger men were more likely to report having a monogamous partnership, but they were also less likely to report condomless anal intercourse with their PRP. In multivariate analysis of partnership arrangements, having a non-monogamous partnership with their PRP was associated with being older (adjusted odds ratio=1.03; 95% confidence interval=1.02-1.04; P<0.001). Nearly two-thirds (62.9%) of men with monogamous partnerships had a clear spoken agreement with their PRP about whether they could have sex with other men, largely regardless of age. Although slightly fewer than half the men with self-described open partnerships (46.0%) actually described it as a 'relationship', younger men were particularly less likely to do so., Conclusions: Due to less communication with partners about sexual agreements, when young GBM engage in sexual risk behaviour they may be at an increased risk of HIV and other sexually transmissible infections.

Background: Frequent testing of individuals at high risk of HIV is central to current prevention strategies. We aimed to determine if HIV self-testing would increase frequency of testing in high-risk gay and bisexual men, with a particular focus on men who delayed testing or had never been tested before., Methods: In this randomised trial, HIV-negative high-risk gay and bisexual men who reported condomless anal intercourse or more than five male sexual partners in the past 3 months were recruited at three clinical and two community-based sites in Australia. Enrolled participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to the intervention (free HIV self-testing plus facility-based testing) or standard care (facility-based testing only). Participants completed a brief online questionnaire every 3 months, which collected the number of self-tests used and the number and location of facility-based tests, and HIV testing was subsequently sourced from clinical records. The primary outcome of number of HIV tests over 12 months was assessed overall and in two strata: recent (last test ≤2 years ago) and non-recent (>2 years ago or never tested) testers. A statistician who was masked to group allocation analysed the data; analyses included all participants who completed at least one follow-up questionnaire. After the 12 month follow-up, men in the standard care group were offered free self-testing kits for a year. This trial is registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, number ACTRN12613001236785., Findings: Between Dec 1, 2013, and Feb 5, 2015, 182 men were randomly assigned to self-testing, and 180 to standard care. The analysis population included 178 (98%) men in the self-testing group (174 person-years) and 165 (92%) in the standard care group (162 person-years). Overall, men in the self-testing group had 701 HIV tests (410 self-tests; mean 4·0 tests per year), and men in the standard care group had 313 HIV tests (mean 1·9 tests per year); rate ratio (RR) 2·08 (95% CI 1·82-2·38; p<0·0001). Among recent testers, men in the self-testing group had 627 tests (356 self-tests; mean 4·2 per year), and men in the standard care group had 297 tests (mean 2·1 per year); RR 1·99 (1·73-2·29; p<0·0001). Among non-recent testers, men in the self-testing group had 74 tests (54 self-tests; mean 2·8 per year), and men in the standard care group had 16 tests (mean 0·7 per year); RR 3·95 (2·30-6·78; p<0·0001). The mean number of facility-based HIV tests per year was similar in the self-testing and standard care groups (mean 1·7 vs 1·9 per year, respectively; RR 0·86, 0·74-1·01; p=0·074). No serious adverse events were reported during follow-up., Interpretation: HIV self-testing resulted in a two times increase in frequency of testing in gay and bisexual men at high risk of infection, and a nearly four times increase in non-recent testers, compared with standard care, without reducing the frequency of facility-based HIV testing. HIV self-testing should be made more widely available to help increase testing and earlier diagnosis., Funding: The National Health and Medical Research Council, Australia., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background Among gay and bisexual men (GBM), 'serosorting' is common and involves restricting sex, or at least condomless sex, to partners of the same HIV status. The prevalence of men conveying their serosorting preferences regarding partners they meet online remains unclear., Methods: This study reviewed 57178 Australian online profiles obtained directly from a popular gay website. Logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with preferences for meeting HIV-positive partners., Results: Men could indicate their preferences from a list of 22 types of partners; 4358 profiles (7.6%) indicated an interest in meeting HIV-positive men. There were 1959 profiles (3.4%) listing a preference for 21 of the 22 types of men, including 1498 men (2.6%) that specifically excluded HIV-positive men. Men who specifically excluded HIV-positive men on their profiles were younger (mean age 34.7 years), less likely to identify as gay (25.6%) and more likely to always prefer 'safer sex' (55.3%) than those who specifically included them (mean age 39.6 years; 62.8% gay-identified; 30.9% preferred safer sex; P<0.001). Men who specifically excluded HIV-positive partners on their profiles were also more likely to live outside major capital cities (P<0.001)., Conclusions: Being younger, living outside major cities, not identifying as gay, always preferring safer sex and either Caucasian or Asian background were associated with excluding HIV-positive men as potential sex partners. These factors may reflect lower social and community engagement with the gay community. The disinclination to include HIV-positive men as potential sex partners may be due to fear of infection, stigma or poor information about HIV.

Gay and bisexual men (GBM) report higher rates of methamphetamine use compared to heterosexual men, and thus have a heightened risk of developing problems from their use. We examined treatment outcomes among GBM clients receiving outpatient counseling at a lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex (LGBTI)-specific, harm reduction treatment service in Sydney, Australia. GBM receiving treatment for methamphetamine use from ACON's Substance Support Service between 2012-15 (n = 101) were interviewed at treatment commencement, and after 4 sessions (n = 60; follow-up 1) and 8 sessions (n = 32; follow-up 2). At each interview, clients completed measures of methamphetamine use and dependence, other substance use, injecting risk practices, psychological distress and quality of life. The median age of participants was 41 years and 56.4% identified as HIV-positive. Participants attended a median of 5 sessions and attended treatment for a median of 112 days. There was a significant reduction in the median days of methamphetamine use in the previous 4 weeks between baseline (4 days), follow-up 1 (2 days) and follow-up 2 (2 days; p = .001). There was a significant reduction in the proportion of participants reporting methamphetamine dependence between baseline (92.1%), follow-up 1 (78.3%) and follow-up 2 (71.9%, p < .001). There were also significant reductions in psychological distress (p < .001), and significant improvements in quality of life (p < .001). Clients showed reductions in methamphetamine use and improved psychosocial functioning over time, demonstrating the potential effectiveness of a LGBTI-specific treatment service.

We surveyed Australian gay and bisexual men, assessing belief in HIV treatment as prevention (TasP) and support for early treatment. We identified the characteristics of participants who believed in TasP and supported early treatment using multivariate logistic regression. In 2013, 1316 men participated; 1251 participated in 2015. Belief in TasP increased from 2.6 % in 2013 to 13.1 % in 2015 (p < 0.001). The increase was most noticeable among HIV-positive men (from 9.7 % to 46.2 %). Support for early treatment increased from 71.8 % to 75.3 % (p = 0.02). Belief in TasP was associated with being HIV-positive, having a tertiary education, having recent condomless anal intercourse with casual male partners, and ever having taken post-exposure prophylaxis. Support for early HIV treatment was associated with being younger, living in New South Wales and being in paid employment. We recommend continued monitoring of the growing gap in belief about TasP between HIV-positive men and HIV-negative/untested men.

Background: Expanded access to HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is being actively debated in Australia. Awareness and knowledge of this HIV-prevention method have not been assessed in detail in the primary affected population, gay and bisexual men. Methods: Awareness and knowledge of PrEP were assessed among Australian gay and bisexual men, who were asked to complete a national, anonymous, online survey in 2015. Associations with PrEP awareness were identified with multivariate logistic regression and associations with PrEP knowledge were identified using multivariate linear regression. Results: Among 1251 participants, 954 (77%) were aware of PrEP. The most common sources of information were gay community media, Australian websites and friends. Awareness of PrEP was independently associated with older age, living in a capital city, having a university degree, being tested for HIV, being HIV-positive, having condomless anal intercourse with regular male partners, and ever having taken post-exposure prophylaxis. Men in monogamous relationships were less likely to be aware of PrEP. Among men who were aware of PrEP, the mean PrEP knowledge score was 6.8 out of 13. Relatively few participants knew that taking PrEP involved regular clinical monitoring and that in Australia PrEP was only recommended for people at risk of HIV. Better knowledge was independently associated with living in a capital city, having a university degree, being in full-time employment, being HIV-positive, and ever having taken post-exposure prophylaxis or PrEP. Conclusions: To assist in appropriate PrEP uptake, we recommend educating gay and bisexual men about current Australian prescribing guidelines and how PrEP is accessed in Australia.