No abstract

Purpose This study investigated the difference of effects between advanced partner notification (APN) and traditional partner notification (TPN). Methods The subjects who had Western bolt test or newly diagnosed with HIV were recruited. All subjects were randomly assigned into experimental and control group, 30 subjects in each group. Advanced Partner Notification was therefore developed based on the self-efficacy concept of Bandura. The process of APN includes advanced interaction model, comprehensive assessment model for partner information, and promoting self-efficacy of partner notification model. In control group, 30 subjects accepted the process of TPN. Results Sixty participants were men who have sex with men and unmarried. The mean age was 28.3 years (SD = 4.64). The results revealed that the index cases of APN were significantly better than the group of TPNM in provided more contactable partner of 107 cases (t = 2.16, p = 0.037), successed notified more partner of 73 cases (t = 2.25, p = 0.029), receiving HIV test more partner of 25 cases (t = 2.05, = 0.046). There were 22 partners whose HIV test were positive in APN group (HIV positive rate was 41.51%) and 7 partners whose HIV test were positive in TPN group (HIV positive rate was 25.0%). The HIV positive partners in APN group were 15 cases (t = 2.64, p = 0.01) more than those in TPN group. In addition, the mean difference in safer sexual knowledge, number of sexual partners, frequency of unsafe sexual behaviours, frequency of safer sexual behaviours, frequency of resource referral numbers, and process evaluation of PN were significantly better than those in TPN group. Conclusion The process of APN is better than the process of TPN in many aspects. The result can improve the quality of current partner notification policy and practise. Background Partner notification (PN) is seen as a vital tool to break HIV/STI transmission chains. In the Netherlands, studies assessing PN effectiveness were lacking. Here, we evaluated effectiveness of current PN practises in STI clinics to provide recommendations to further enhance PN. Methods PN outcomes were collected through a newly developed registration system from index patients with HIV, syphilis, and gonorrhoea visiting five STI centres in 2010-2011. PN outcomes for men who have sex with men (MSM) and heterosexuals included partners: at risk, notifiable, notified, tested and diagnosed with STI/HIV. Results Of all index patients newly diagnosed with HIV/STI (N = 388) for whom PN was indicated, 312 MSM, 35 heterosexual men and 41 women reported respectively 2042, 126 and 82 partners at risk (6.5, 3.6 and 2.0 partners per index). Proportions of notifiable partners differed significantly by sexual preference (MSM: 46%, heterosexual men: 63%, women: 87%, p < 0.001). Proportions of notified partners (of those notifiable) were lowest for heterosexual men (77% versus 92% for MSM and 83% for women, p < 0.001). STI positivity rates among partners were high for all groups: 33%-50%. Partner notifiCation outComes for msm an...