BackgroundMigrant populations from countries with generalised HIV epidemics make up a significant proportion of all HIV/AIDS cases in many European Union and European Economic Area (EU/EEA) countries, with heterosexual transmission the predominant mode of HIV acquisition. While most of these infections are diagnosed for the first time in Europe, acquisition is believed to have predominantly occurred in the home country. A proportion of HIV transmission is believed to be occurring post-migration, and many countries may underestimate the degree to which this is occurring. Our objectives were to review the literature estimating the proportion of migrants believed to have acquired their HIV post-migration and examine which EU member states are able to provide estimates of probable country of HIV acquisition through current surveillance systems.MethodsA systematic review was undertaken to gather evidence of sexual transmission of HIV within Europe among populations from countries with a generalised epidemic. In addition, national surveillance focal points from 30 EU/EEA Member States were asked to complete a questionnaire about surveillance methods and monitoring of the likely place of HIV acquisition among migrants.Results & discussionTwenty-seven papers from seven countries were included in the review and 24 countries responded to the survey. Estimates of HIV acquisition post-migration ranged from as low as 2 % among sub Saharan Africans in Switzerland, to 62 % among black Caribbean men who have sex with men (MSM) in the UK. Surveillance methods for monitoring post-migration acquisition varied across the region; a range of methods are used to estimate country or region of HIV acquisition, including behavioural and clinical markers. There is little published evidence addressing this issue, although Member States highlight the importance of migrant populations in their epidemics.ConclusionsThere is post-migration HIV acquisition among migrants in European countries but this is difficult to quantify accurately with current data. Migrant MSM appear at particular risk of HIV acquisition post-migration. Countries that identify migrants as an important part of their HIV epidemic should focus on using an objective method for assigning probable country of HIV acquisition. Robust methods to measure HIV incidence should be considered in order to inform national prevention programming and resource allocation.

IntroductionPartner notification (PN) is a process aiming to identify, test and treat the sex partners of people (index patients) with sexually transmitted infections (STIs). Accelerated partner therapy (APT) is a PN method whereby healthcare professionals assess sex partners, by telephone consultation, before giving the index patient antibiotics and STI self-sampling kits to deliver to their sex partner(s). The Limiting Undetected Sexually Transmitted infections to RedUce Morbidity programme aims to determine the effectiveness of APT in heterosexual women and men with chlamydia and determine whether APT could affectChlamydia trachomatistransmission at population level.Methods and analysisThis protocol describes a cross-over cluster randomised controlled trial of APT, offered as an additional PN method, compared with standard PN. The trial is accompanied by an economic evaluation, transmission dynamic modelling and a qualitative process evaluation involving patients, partners and healthcare professionals. Clusters are 17 sexual health clinics in areas of England and Scotland with contrasting patient demographics. We will recruit 5440 heterosexual women and men with chlamydia, aged ≥16 years.The primary outcome is the proportion of index patients testing positive forC. trachomatis12-16 weeks after the PN consultation. Secondary outcomes include: proportion of sex partners treated; cost effectiveness; model-predicted chlamydia prevalence; experiences of APT.The primary outcome analysis will be by intention-to-treat, fitting random effects logistic regression models that account for clustering of index patients within clinics and trial periods. The transmission dynamic model will be used to predict change in chlamydia prevalence following APT. The economic evaluation will use mathematical modelling outputs, taking a health service perspective. Qualitative data will be analysed using interpretative phenomenological analysis and framework analysis.Ethics and disseminationThis protocol received ethical approval from London—Chelsea Research Ethics Committee (18/LO/0773). Findings will be published with open access licences.Trial registration numberISRCTN15996256.

ObjectivesTo develop a classification of sexual partner types for use in partner notification (PN) for STIs.MethodsA four-step process: (1) an iterative synthesis of five sources of evidence: scoping review of social and health sciences literature on partner types; analysis of relationship types in dating apps; systematic review of PN intervention content; and review of PN guidelines; qualitative interviews with public, patients and health professionals to generate an initial comprehensive classification; (2) multidisciplinary clinical expert consultation to revise the classification; (3) piloting of the revised classification in sexual health clinics during a randomised controlled trial of PN; (4) application of the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) to identify index patients’ willingness to engage in PN for each partner type.ResultsFive main partner types emerged from the evidence synthesis and consultation: ‘established partner’, ‘new partner’, ‘occasional partner’, ‘one-off partner’ and ‘sex worker’. The types differed across several dimensions, including likely perceptions of sexual exclusivity, likelihood of sex reoccurring between index patient and sex partner. Sexual health professionals found the classification easy to operationalise. During the trial, they assigned all 3288 partners described by 2223 index patients to a category. The TDF analysis suggested that the partner types might be associated with different risks of STI reinfection, onward transmission and index patients’ engagement with PN.ConclusionsWe developed an evidence-informed, useable classification of five sexual partner types to underpin PN practice and other STI prevention interventions. Analysis of biomedical, psychological and social factors that distinguish different partner types shows how each could warrant a tailored PN approach. This classification could facilitate the use of partner-centred outcomes. Additional studies are needed to determine the utility of the classification to improve measurement of the impact of PN strategies and help focus resources.

Objectives1.5 million people in the UK have mild to moderate learning disabilities. STIs and bloodborne viruses (BBVs) are over-represented in people experiencing broader health inequalities, which include those with mild learning disabilities. Self-managed care, including self-sampling for STIs/BBVs, is increasingly commonplace, requiring agency and health literacy. To inform the development of a partner notification trial, we explored barriers and facilitators to correct use of an STI/BBV self-sampling pack among people with mild learning disabilities.MethodsUsing purposive and convenience sampling we conducted four interviews and five gender-specific focus groups with 25 people (13 women, 12 men) with mild learning disabilities (July–August 2018) in Scotland. We balanced deductive and inductive thematic analyses of audio transcripts to explore issues associated with barriers and facilitators to correct use of the pack.ResultsAll participants found at least one element of the pack challenging or impossible, but welcomed the opportunity to undertake sexual health screening without attending a clinic and welcomed the inclusion of condoms. Reported barriers to correct use included perceived overly complex STI/BBV information and instructions, feeling overwhelmed and the manual dexterity required for blood sampling. Many women struggled interpreting anatomical diagrams depicting vulvovaginal self-swabbing. Facilitators included pre-existing STI/BBV knowledge, familiarity with self-management, good social support and knowing that the service afforded privacy.ConclusionIn the first study to explore the usability of self-sampling packs for STI/BBV in people with learning disabilities, participants found it challenging to use the pack. Limiting information to the minimum required to inform decision-making, ‘easy read’ formats, simple language, large font sizes and simpler diagrams could improve acceptability. However, some people will remain unable to engage with self-sampling at all. To avoid widening health inequalities, face-to-face options should continue to be provided for those unable or unwilling to engage with self-managed care.

Introduction: The number of bacterial sexually transmitted infections diagnosed among men who have sex with men (MSM) continues to rise annually. Innovative public health interventions are needed to address this. Partner notification (PN), is important in reducing STI transmission by identifying, testing and treating the sex partners of people with STIs. Outcomes of PN in MSM are sub-optimal; some MSM with STIs report high numbers of one-off sex partners (where sex occurs on one occasion only) who appear to contribute disproportionately to community transmission but are poorly reached by current PN interventions. Aims/Objectives: This paper describes the protocol for development of a novel, co-produced, multi-level, PN intervention for MSM with one-off partners. The process described will ensure the intervention is evidence-based, theoretically informed and acceptable to users, service providers, commissioners and those with community interest. Methods and Analysis: Our three-phase approach draws on the revised Medical Research Council (MRC) guidance for developing and evaluating complex interventions. First, we combine evidence synthesis with stakeholder engagement to understand the barriers and enablers to PN to co-produce preliminary intervention ideas. Next, we further develop our intervention ideas and adapt our emerging programme theory by collecting detailed data through focus groups and interviews with purposively sampled stakeholders. Data analysis using the theoretical domains framework and the behaviour change wheel will detail the relationship between putative causal mechanisms and optimal intervention components involved in enhancing PN amongst MSM. Finally, we refine our programme theory, map and clarify our intervention and its intersecting components. We will share our intervention with a panel of expert clinicians, third sector organisations and a lay audience of MSM to detail a co-produced PN intervention. Outcome: Co-produced intervention and programme theory suitable for testing in a future feasibility study.