Search

Although many studies reported on decreases in sexual partner numbers among gay and bisexual-identifying men in the early period of the COVID-19 pandemic, few studies have explored COVID-19 risk-reduction strategies. Drawing on free-text responses in an online survey (from April to July 2020), we describe the ways in which men sought to minimise the risk of COVID-19 in sexual encounters. Partner selection was an important strategy, in particular, restricting sex to men they already knew. Accounts also indicate how participants assessed risk from potential sex partners based on symptoms, residential location, recent travel, work role, and number of other sexual contacts. Less common were in situ practices, such as avoiding kissing. Participants' responses provide insight into creative community-based responses in the early months of the pandemic, some of which have resonances with early responses to HIV. Findings are discussed in relation to the concepts of 'lay epidemiology' and 'counterpublic health'. In particular, we examine how risks and health are experienced and valued in relation to local knowledges, meanings, and practices; and how practices emerge in response to dominant public health discourses that produce an idealised public based on (hetero)normative assumptions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We examined depression and anxiety prior to and during COVID-19 restrictions in Australian gay and bisexual men (GBM). In an online cohort, a COVID-19-focused survey was conducted in April 2020. During 2019 and in April 2020, 664 GBM completed the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9, measuring depression) and Generalized Anxiety Disorder Assessment (GAD-7, measuring anxiety). Increased depression and anxiety were defined as a ≥ 5 point increase on the respective scales. Mean PHQ-9 and GAD-7 scores increased between 2019 and 2020 (PHQ-9: from 5.11 in 2019 to 6.55 in 2020; GAD-7: from 3.80 in 2019 to 4.95 in 2020). The proportion of participants with moderate-severe depression (PHQ-9 ≥ 10) increased from 18.8% (n = 125) to 25.5% (n = 169), while the proportion of participants with moderate-severe anxiety (GAD-7 ≥ 10) increased from 12.7% (n = 84) to 17.3% (n = 115). Almost one-quarter of participants (n = 158, 23.8%) had increased depression; in these men, mean PHQ-9 increased from 2.49 in 2019 to 11.65 in 2020 (p < 0.001). One-in-five (20.6%) participants (n = 137) had increased anxiety; among these men, mean GAD-7 increased from 2.05 in 2019 to 10.22 in 2020 (p < 0.001). Increases were associated with concerns about job security, reduction in social and sexual connections and opportunities, and being personally concerned about COVID-19 itself. COVID-19 appeared to have a sudden and pronounced impact on depression and anxiety in Australian GBM, with a significant minority showing sharp increases. Ongoing monitoring is required to determine longer-term impacts and GBM need access to appropriate and sensitive supports both during and after the COVID-19 pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Research suggests that hepatitis C virus (HCV) transmission is more likely among gay and bisexual men (GBM) who engage in sexually adventurous practices, including group sex while using drugs. The current study explored drug use, sexual practices, HCV knowledge, HCV disclosure, and beliefs about HCV transmission among GBM (n = 193) reporting group sex after/while using drugs compared to those who did not. Survey findings indicate that men who participated in group sex while using drugs were more likely to have engaged in other sexually adventurous practices, ever injected drugs, have greater knowledge of HCV, and to be living with HIV. They were also more likely to perceive themselves at risk of acquiring HCV and to know that their sexual activities put them at risk. Interestingly, they had lower expectations of HCV disclosure and were less concerned about the HCV status of their partners. The lower expectations around disclosure and concern about the HCV status of their partners reflect the challenges for GBM in managing HCV transmission where there are limited effective behavioural strategies for reducing sexual transmission, This research also highlights the need to promote HCV testing and treatment to GBM who engage in group sex while using drugs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Increases in hepatitis C (HCV) infections among gay and bisexual men have recently been reported in a number of countries, with sexual transmission being the primary route of infection. Given that in countries such as Australia most gay and bisexual men living with HIV are already engaged in clinical care - as are an increasing number of HIV-negative men - there is potential for reducing onward HCV transmission through proactive testing and treatment. This study explored knowledge, attitudes and practices related to HCV among 194 gay and bisexual men collected through an online survey in Australia. Overall, respondents had high levels of HCV knowledge; however, only 76% knew about the availability of new treatments for HCV. Men's knowledge of their own HCV testing history was uncertain, with one in six unaware if they had ever been tested. Among men who reported recent drug injecting, one-third had been injected by someone else, and two-thirds had injected someone else, indicating a subculture of cross-administering within sexualised drug-use networks. We argue that the robust sexual, socio-cultural and clinical infrastructure that has been developed by - and for - gay and bisexual men around HIV care and prevention creates the potential for reducing HCV in this group. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Same-sex marriage is a widely debated issue, including in Australia. This study used an online anonymous survey, with free-text responses, to investigate romantic and sexual relationships among Australian gay and bisexual men. We sought to identify what proportion of such men intended to marry their primary regular partner if marriage was made legally available to same-sex couples in Australia, as well as factors associated with intention or non-intention to marry. Most men in the sample did not intend to marry their primary regular partner. Even among men who considered themselves to be in a ‘relationship’ with their primary regular partner, less than half intended to marry him. However, many men who would not marry their current primary regular partner agreed that same-sex marriage should be available for gay and bisexual men in Australia. Reasons for intention to marry included a desire for social and legal equality, and ideas about marriage as a rite of passage, an expression of love and the most valued form of relationship in Australia. Those who did not intend to marry their primary regular partner offered a number of reasons, including that the nature of their relationship was incompatible with marriage, and reported a critical position towards marriage as a heteronormative institution. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Background: In response to the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, Australia introduced public health and physical distancing restrictions in late March 2020. We investigated the impact of these restrictions on HIV preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) use among Australian gay and bisexual men (GBM). Methods: Participants in an ongoing online cohort study previously reported PrEP use from 2014 to 2019. In April 2020, 847 HIV-negative and untested participants completed questionnaires assessing changes in PrEP use as a result of COVID-19 public health measures. Binary logistic multiple regression was used to estimate adjusted odds ratios (aOR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) to compare changes in PrEP use behaviors. Results: Among 847 men, mean age was 44.1 years (SD: 12.7). PrEP use rose from 4.9% in 2015 to 47.2% in 2020. Among those, 41.8% (n = 167) discontinued PrEP use during COVID-19 restrictions. Discontinuing PrEP during COVID-19 restrictions was independently associated with being less likely to have recently tested for HIV (aOR: 0.17; 95% CI: 0.09 to 0.34; P < 0.001) and less likely to report sex with casual partners (aOR: 0.28; 95% CI: 0.14 to 0.54; P < 0.001). Conclusions: By April 2020, following the introduction of COVID-19 restrictions, GBM dramatically reduced PrEP use, coinciding with a reduction in sexual activity. Longer-term impacts of COVID-19 restrictions on sexual behaviors among GBM need to be monitored because they may foreshadow fluctuations in prevention coverage and risk of HIV infection. Our findings indicate a potential need for clear, targeted information about resumption of PrEP and on-demand optimal dosing regimens in response to ongoing changes in restrictions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We surveyed willingness to use pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) and the likelihood of decreased condom use among Australian gay and bisexual men in 2011 and 2013 (n = 2384). Willingness to use PrEP declined from 28.2% to 23.3% [adjusted odds ratio = 0.83, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.68 to 1.00, P = 0.050]. Willingness to use PrEP was the greatest among men with HIV-positive partners and among those who had taken HIV postexposure prophylaxis. Among men willing to use PrEP, the likelihood of decreased condom use remained stable between 2011 and 2013 (8.0% vs. 11.9%; adjusted odds ratio = 1.40, 95% CI: 0.80 to 2.45, P = 0.23). A minority of men remain willing to use PrEP and appear to be appropriate candidates for it. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]