Search

People with or at risk for mpox are likely to be stigmatized because of analogies to other sexually transmitted infections. Stigma is driven by beliefs about the perceived severity of the condition and perceived responsibility for acquiring the condition, both in broader society and individual responsibility. We explored these beliefs and compared them across mpox, human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), syphilis, gonorrhoea, and chlamydia in an online survey, conducted in July 2022, with 394 men‐who‐have‐sex‐with‐men in the Netherlands. We compared mean scores between infections using repeated measures analysis of variance and conducted hierarchical regression analyses to identify determinants of both mpox perceived responsibility endpoints. Results showed that participants expected that mpox would be seen as a "gay disease" and will be used to blame gay men. Compared to other infections, mpox was considered less severe than HIV, but more severe than syphilis, gonorrhoea, and chlamydia. Perceived responsibility was comparable across infections, but, for each infection, participants perceived attributed responsibility to be higher in society than individual responsibility. Both perceived responsibility endpoints were highly correlated with each other and with other stigma beliefs. These results provide insight on the underlying determinants of mpox stigma and demonstrate that anticipated mpox stigma is present in the Netherlands. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To assess whether HIV-negative men who have sex with men (MSM) have realistic views of the current implications of living with HIV, we compared data of 950 tested HIV-negative and 122 never-tested MSM on anticipated consequences of an HIV-infection to the actual experiences of 438 MSM living with HIV. Data were collected with a self-reported, web-based survey conducted between May–June 2019 in the Netherlands. Results indicated that, compared to HIV-positive MSM, HIV-negative MSM significantly overestimated 95% (37/39) of items assessing HIV-related burden. Never-tested participants overestimated 85% (33/39) of items. Overestimation in never-tested MSM was modified with increasing age and having HIV-positive friends/relatives. The high level of overestimation suggests the ongoing need to correct for misperceptions, as this could help reduce stigma towards those living with HIV and diminish fear of an HIV-diagnosis. The latter might be important to improve testing uptake in older never-tested MSM with outdated views on HIV. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Pre‐Exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) is a novel HIV prevention tool. PrEP stigma is a frequently reported barrier, while social disclosure of PrEP use may be an important facilitator. We explored how PrEP users managed PrEP use disclosure using a symbolic interactionist approach. We interviewed 32 participants from two PrEP demonstration projects (Be‐PrEP‐ared, Antwerp; AMPrEP, Amsterdam). We validated qualitative findings through Be‐PrEP‐ared questionnaire data. A minority of participants had received negative reactions on PrEP. The way PrEP use was disclosed was highly dependent on the social situation. In a sexual context among MSM, PrEP use was associated with condomless sex. Friends endorsed PrEP use as a healthy choice, but also related it to carelessness and promiscuity. It was seldom disclosed to colleagues and family, which is mostly related to social norms dictating when it is acceptable to talk about sex. The study findings reveal that PrEP stigma experiences were not frequent in this population, and that PrEP users actively manage disclosure of their PrEP user status. Frequent disclosure and increased use may have helped PrEP becoming normalised in these MSM communities. To increase uptake, peer communication, community activism and framing PrEP as health promotion rather than a risk‐reduction intervention may be crucial. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is a promising strategy to reduce HIV incidence among men who have sex with men (MSM). How and when PrEP is used could in part be influenced by its impact on the sexual well-being of its users. Yet, the impact of PrEP on sexual well-being has received little attention in current literature and is not well-understood. We conducted 43 in-depth interviews (June 2017–June 2018) with HIV-negative MSM who started PrEP within the Amsterdam PrEP study. We used purposive sampling to select participants who (1) reported changes on well-being indicators; (2) switched between PrEP-dosing regimens; (3) neither changed regimens nor changed on well-being indicators. Transcribed interviews were qualitatively analyzed by means of an open-coding process. Results showed that PrEP minimized HIV-related fear, increased self-esteem, and reduced stigma and shame about having condomless anal sex. The psychological relief provided by PrEP also enabled relaxation which reduced pain during anal sex. PrEP use increased the diversity of partner choices and improved the perceived quality of sexual relationships and the ability to develop relationships. Along with this positive impact, almost half of interviewees reported concurrent negative experiences. In some cases, PrEP triggered more extreme sexual behaviors and/or problematic increases in preoccupation with sex and drug use. These were perceived as having a negative impact on sexual relationships, sexual well-being, PrEP adherence, and general health. In conclusion, our findings suggest that PrEP contributes to improvements in sexual well-being that go beyond protection from HIV. Counseling strategies should be devised to help PrEP users mitigate possible co-existing negative consequences of PrEP use. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]