Introductn: HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) the form of a daily oral meditn is highly effective at preventg HIV. In the Uned Stat, awarens about PrEP has steadily creased over time among dividuals vulnerable to HIV, however awarens has not translated to wisle uptake. Estimat are that fewer than 20% of 1.2 ln Amerins for whom PrEP is dited are utilizg . We sought to unrstand how dividuals moved om PrEP awarens to PrEP utilizatn.Methods: We nducted a seri (n = 31) of -pth terviews wh young people, predomantly gay and bisexual men, ag 18–29 years old between Febary 2015 and January 2016, as part of the evaluatn of a multi-year monstratn project fund to tt novative approach to improve sexual health out and curb the HIV epimic California. Interviews were d-rerd and transcribed verbatim. We nducted a thematic analysis.Rults: We prent a ntuum of PrEP awarens that spans three phas—basic, morate and advanced. Participants rarely reported beg well-rmed about PrEP over the urse of an ial exposure to PrEP rmatn. Learng occurred after multiple exposur to PrEP rmatn through numero tersectg forms, msengers and formal and rmal munitn channels. Posively amed msag livered by formal msengers emphasizg PrEP as a sensible HIV preventn strategy and explicly munitg a regard for sexual wellns were...
Contents:
- THE RELEVANCE OF PRE-EXPOSURE PROPHYLAXIS GAY MEN’S LIV AND THEIR MOTIVATNS TO E : A QUALATIVE STUDY
- PREP FOR GAY MEN 101: EVERYTHG GAY MEN NEED TO KNOW ABOUT TAKG HIV PREVENTN MEDITN!
- SOME GAY AND BISEXUAL MEN SEE PREP AS A 'SOCIAL PROBLEM'
- MYTH OR TTH: IS PREP JT FOR GAY AND BI MEN?
- REARCH PAPERPRE-EXPOSURE PROPHYLAXIS (PREP) UPTAKE AND ADHERENCE EXPERIENC OF GAY AND BISEXUAL MEN WHO ENGAGE CHEMSEX: A QUALATIVE STUDY
- EXPLORG THE SHIFT FROM HIV PRE-EXPOSURE PROPHYLAXIS AWARENS TO UPTAKE AMONG YOUNG GAY AND BISEXUAL MEN
THE RELEVANCE OF PRE-EXPOSURE PROPHYLAXIS GAY MEN’S LIV AND THEIR MOTIVATNS TO E : A QUALATIVE STUDY
HIV has affected gay men disproportnately the U.S. for four s. Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) was veloped as a preventn strategy for dividuals at high risk of HIV fectn. Although highly effective, many gay and other men who have sex wh men ntue not to take PrEP. Rearchers have foced on sexual risk behavrs as the primary termant of who should be on PrEP and intified var objective systemic and societal barriers to PrEP accs. Public health measur have promoted PrEP based on the objective creria. Rearchers have recently begun to quire to subjective and relatnal motivators for PrEP age beyond self-perceived risk. Participants were reced through snowball samplg. Data were llected between Augt and November 2018 om PrEP ers (n = 7) and PrEP non-ers (n = 6). Data were analyzed a modified ground theory qualative analysis. The thirteen participants’ narrativ ntaed three superordate tegori: (1) what ’s like to be someone on PrEP, (2) an environment of changg sexual norms, and (3) the ntued importance of tn. The tegori prised ten them, each of which had var repeatg ias. The ten them were the followg: (1) PrEP’s social acceptabily, (2) PrEP and HIV stigma, (3) PrEP and sexual relatnships, (4) dissatisfactn wh ndoms, (5) negotiatg risk, (6) peace of md, (7) velopg a relatnship wh PrEP, (8) puttg yourself first, (9) PrEP awarens, and (10) PrEP logistics. The gay men our study took to nsiratn their social rol and relatnships, their personal beliefs, and emotnal histori as well as risk as proment motivators for PrEP e. They stated that PrEP e is associated wh their sense of belongg, tst, and secury about their sexualy. They also intified the most relevant aspects of the meditn (e.g., si effects, adherence, and awarens) to their liv. * prep in gay *
ConclnsThe gay men our study took to nsiratn their social rol and relatnships, their personal beliefs, and emotnal histori as well as risk as proment motivators for PrEP e.
Although highly effective, PrEP has not been highly accsed by many populatns at high risk of HIV fectn cludg gay and other men who have sex wh men (llectively GMSM) [2]. We hope our study enrich extant PrEP rearch through a ground theory approach [27] via terviews of gay men who have nsired g PrEP, focg on the beliefs, feelgs, and experienc that unrgird their sense of the relevance of PrEP e to their liv that then affect whether they are motivated to e . Eligible participants were reced by the rearchers through emails on their personal and profsnal works, through flyers at lol LGBT service centers, and through Redd msage boards “askgaybros, ” “gay, ” “SampleSize, ” “hivaids, ” and “PrEPared.
” All participants were mal who self-intified as gay, English- or Spanish-speakg, over age 18, and sexually active wh the past 6 months. Th, this project’s sample prised a largely homogeno group of Csian, highly ted, middle to upper-middle class, cis gay men, seven sgle and six some form of mted partnership. U3 ( his 20s) has been an open relatnship for 2 years wh an HIV-negative gay man who is also on PrEP.
PREP FOR GAY MEN 101: EVERYTHG GAY MEN NEED TO KNOW ABOUT TAKG HIV PREVENTN MEDITN!
Today, we look at the myth that PrEP is jt for gay and bisexual men. * prep in gay *
5 years ago when he entered a sexually monogamo bond wh an HIV negative gay male partner who is not on PrEP. N12 ( his 30s) is sexually active exclively wh his romantic partner, an HIV-negative gay man, wh the ntext of a sexually monogamo relatnship. ” By drawg the nnectn between attus towards PrEP and attus towards gay sex, U7 explicly acknowledged that PrEP e rri social meang and reprents more than jt an HIV preventn the men our study, the meang of intifyg as g PrEP extend beyond notns of belongg and muny and was related to fear and stigma associated wh sex and sexual inty.
SOME GAY AND BISEXUAL MEN SEE PREP AS A 'SOCIAL PROBLEM'
While HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is highly effective, has arguably dispted norms of ‘safe sex’ that for many years were synonymo wh ndom e. This qualative study explored the culture of PrEP adoptn and evolvg ncepts of ‘safe sex’ Sydney, Atralia, durg a perd of rapidly latg accs om 2015–2018, drawg on terviews wh sexually active gay men (n = 31) and terviews and foc groups wh key stakeholrs (n = 10). Data were analysed thematilly. Our rults explored the creasg centraly of ndoms risk rctn and new patterns of sexual negotiatn. Wh regards to stigma, we found that there was arguably more stigma related to not takg PrEP than to takg PrEP this sample. We also found that participants remaed highly engaged wh promotg the wellbeg of their muni through activi as seemgly disparate as regular STI ttg, promotn of PrEP their social circl, and ntributn to rearch. This study has important implitns for health promotn. It monstrat how nstctg PrEP as a rigid new standard to which gay men ‘should’ adhere n alienate some men and potentially create muny divisns. Instead, we remend promotg choice om a range of HIV preventn optns that have both high efficy and high acceptabily. * prep in gay *
Participants (n = 7) stated that g PrEP is associated wh promiscuy and risky behavr and that PrEP stigma leads to shame and judgment of gay men who e PrEP. She was surprised that there were many shame issu, and out of mted gay relatnships, about g PrEP, which ma the experience of g PrEP those participants’ relatnal world irrelevant or negatively experienced.
MYTH OR TTH: IS PREP JT FOR GAY AND BI MEN?
He was surprised that gay men shame and judge each other about the e of PrEP even wh timate relatnships, and that gay men nceal the relevance of PrEP om those close to them.
REARCH PAPERPRE-EXPOSURE PROPHYLAXIS (PREP) UPTAKE AND ADHERENCE EXPERIENC OF GAY AND BISEXUAL MEN WHO ENGAGE CHEMSEX: A QUALATIVE STUDY
She was surprised by our fdgs of shame and out of mted gay relatnships and the irrelevant or negative experience has on PrEP e. The rearchers hypothized that when gay men nsir g PrEP, they nsir subjective and relatnal factors over and above their self-perceived risk. In the prent study we sought to ask gay men about how risk and other factors affected their motivatns about whether to e PrEP, and how risk and PrEP were relevant to their lived experience.
Thirteen gay men shared timate tails of their liv unrstandg they would not be pensated but that their stori would ntribute to a body of rearch that aims to unrstand and help GMSM who nsir g PrEP. Participants talked about how their iends viewed PrEP differently than how they talked about the “gay world’s” attu toward PrEP. One participant who prevly ed PrEP stated that beg on PrEP is “almost the norm wh the gay world” (N4, 20s, open relatnship, $85 k).
EXPLORG THE SHIFT FROM HIV PRE-EXPOSURE PROPHYLAXIS AWARENS TO UPTAKE AMONG YOUNG GAY AND BISEXUAL MEN
Concern about the gay muny motivated participants to e PrEP to be “rponsible” by “dog their part” to stop the spread of HIV. Participants’ views ranged om “It’s almost the norm to e PrEP the gay world” (N4, 20s, open relatnship, $85 k) to “I thk people jt don’t know ’s there” (U3, 20s, open relatnship, $65 k). This, too, has been supported prev lerature which participants’ skepticism of medil profsnals is a reason why they do not seek talk to their provirs about PrEP [55] men our study njectured that creasg mpaigns to promote PrEP tn, particularly on not only targetg gay men, might help crease uptake.
The participants this study were largely a homogeno group primarily nsistg of young, Whe, affluent, highly ted, gay-intifyg HIV-negative cisgenr men. To addrs gaps the lerature and velop greater sight about PrEP’s meang the cultural ntext of gay men specifilly, we asked both gay men who ed PrEP and those who ntemplated PrEP but did not iate about what factors were relevant when they cid whether to e and to the experienc unrgirdg the cisns. Sexual risk behavrs and acceptabily of HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis among HIV-negative gay and bisexual men serodisrdant relatnships: a mixed methods study.