Background: Transgender men and non-binary people assigned female at birth (TMNB) who have not had surgery to remove the cervix are recommended to undertake cervical screening with the same frequency as cisgender women but evidence suggests that TMNB have lower odds of lifetime and up-to-date cervical screening uptake. Aim: To understand the attitudes towards and preferences for cervical screening among UK-based TMNB. Design & Setting: Cross-sectional survey of TMNB at an NHS gender identity clinic (GIC) and an NHS sexual health service specialising in care of transgender people. Method: Recruitment was via email invitations to patients of the GIC and sexual health service. Inclusion criteria were: female sex assigned at birth, trans man, masculine, or non-binary gender identity, age ≥18 and UK resident. Quantitative results were analysed using descriptive statistics and free text comments were analysed thematically. Results: There were 137 participants, 79% identifying as transmasculine and 18% as non-binary. Sixty-five participants (46%) were eligible for cervical screening and 56.9% of those had ever been screened. Only 53.1% of those eligible felt they had sufficient information about cervical screening . Just over half (53%) stated they would like the option to self-swab for high-risk HPV. Only half of the participants were in favour of an automatic invitation for cervical screening . Thematic analysis identified a number of additional barriers and facilitators of screening. Conclusions: TMNB have identified numerous potential areas for change that may improve cervical screening uptake and patient experience.

ObjectivesTrans people remain an understudied population in the UK, with unmet sexual health needs. The aim of this research was to identify possible barriers and facilitators for sexual health clinic attendance and HIV testing among trans people.MethodsLesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) participants from across the UK were invited to take part in a cross-sectional online survey through Facebook advertising (April–June 2018). Psychosocial and sexual factors associated with recent sexual health clinic attendance, and ever having an HIV test were examined using multivariate logistic regression.ResultsA total of 3007 cisgender and 500 trans participants completed the survey. Trans participants were less likely to attend a sexual health clinic than cisgender participants (27% vs 36%, p<0.001) and report ever having an HIV test (49% vs 64%, p<0.001). One trans participant reported living with HIV and three reported currently taking pre-exposure prophylaxis. Factors associated with trans sexual health clinic attendance were: living in London, having a relationship with multiple partners, engaging in condomless anal intercourse, greater life satisfaction, and having alcohol and/or drugs before sex. Being a person of colour, aged 25–49 years, in a relationship with multiple partners, condomless anal intercourse, lower body dissatisfaction, and having drugs before sex were associated with ever having an HIV test among trans participants.ConclusionsTrans people were less likely to attend sexual health services than cisgender people, and half of trans participants who reported condomless anal intercourse had never had an HIV test. Further research is needed to understand and improve uptake of sexual health services among trans people.

Background Transgender, or trans, people experience a number of barriers to accessing gender-affirming healthcare and have a range of barriers and facilitators to primary care and specialist services, commonly citing discrimination and cisgenderism playing a central role in shaping accessibility. The pathway through primary care to specialist services is a particularly precarious time for trans people, and misinformation and poorly applied protocols can have a detrimental impact on wellbeing. Method We recruited trans participants from an HIV Self-Testing Public Health Intervention (SELPHI) trial to interviews which explored contemporary gender-affirming service experiences, with an aim to examine the path from primary care services through to specialist gender services, in the UK. Results A narrative synthesis of vignettes and thematic analysis of in-depth qualitative interviews were conducted with twenty trans individuals. We summarise positive and negative accounts of care under three broad categories: Experiences with primary care physicians, referrals to gender identity clinics (GICs), and experiences at GICs. Conclusions We discuss implications of this research in terms of how to improve best practice for trans people attempting to access gender-affirming healthcare in the UK. Here we highlight the importance of GP’s access to knowledge around pathways and protocols and clinical practice which treats trans patients holistically.

The People Living with HIV StigmaSurvey UK 2015 was a community led national survey investigating experiences of people living with HIV in the UK in the past 12 months. Participants aged 18 and over were recruited through over 120 cross-sector community organisations and 46 HIV clinics to complete an anonymous online survey. Trans is an umbrella term which refers to individuals whose current gender identity is different to the gender they were assigned at birth. Trans participants self-identified via gender identity and gender at birth questions. Descriptive analyses of reported experiences in social and health care settings were conducted and multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to identify sociodemographic predictors of reporting being treated differently to non-HIV patients, and being delayed or refused healthcare treatment in the past 12 months. 31 out of 1576 participants (2%) identified as trans (19 trans women, 5 trans men, 2 gender queer/non-binary, 5 other). High levels of social stigma were reported for all participants, with trans participants significantly more likely to report worrying about verbal harassment (39% vs. 23%), and exclusion from family gatherings (23% vs. 9%) in the last 12 months, compared to cisgender participants. Furthermore, 10% of trans participants reported physical assault in the last 12 months, compared to 4% of cisgender participants. Identifying as trans was a predictor of reporting being treated differently to non-HIV patients (48% vs. 30%; aOR 2.61, CI 1.06, 6.42) and being delayed or refused healthcare (41% vs. 16%; aOR 4.58, CI 1.83, 11.44). Trans people living with HIV in the UK experience high levels of stigma and discrimination, including within healthcare settings, which is likely to impact upon health outcomes. Trans-specific education and awareness within healthcare settings could help to improve service provision for this demographic.

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 TM) (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 followup (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.