Negotiated safety and other agreements between men in relationships: risk practice redefined

Sex and Sexual Agreement Negotiation among Trans Women and Trans Men Partnered with Cis Men

Though trans individuals have some of the highest rates of HIV in the U.S., little is known about how trans couples navigate these risks within committed relationships. Thirty-nine couples, composed of one trans partner and one cis male partner, were asked about their relationship agreements, including sexual negotiations, in semi-structured, qualitative interviews. Couples reported definitions of monogamy and non-monogamy that were inconsistent with previous literature, each ranging as if on a continuum. While agreements varied, most non-monogamous couples reported a focus on safe sex practices and HIV risk mitigation, specifically highlighting negotiations around fluid exchange or fluid bonding. Changes in sexual desire arose for many couples, often due to hormonal changes during gender-affirming measures. Most couples navigated these shifts successfully, by changing their relationship agreement or sexual practices. Changing sexual behavior included addressing motivations for sex that were unrelated to one's own sexual pleasure; this motivation is called "maintenance sex." Alarmingly, nearly half of the couples interviewed reported discrepant agreements, which is associated with higher sexual risk. With an apparent ambiguity in defining agreements, it is imperative to trans communities' sexual health that relationship agreements are explicitly communicated to partners and healthcare providers.

Use of "Strengthening Our Vows" Video Intervention to Encourage Negotiated Explicit Sexual Agreements in Zambian Heterosexual HIV Seroconcordant-Negative Couples

Negotiating sexual agreements in combination with couples' voluntary HIV counseling and testing (CVCT) may help further reduce HIV transmission in Zambian concordant HIV-negative couples (CNC). Though CVCT has been shown to reduce HIV transmission in CNC by 47%, approximately half of residual infections occur in this group. We developed a "Strengthening Our Vows" video session to foster communication and negotiation of explicit sexual agreements to reduce concurrent sexual exposures and prevent HIV transmission to the spouse due to unprotected, extramarital sex. CNC were recruited through CVCT services at five clinics in Lusaka and Ndola in 2016. Enrolled CNC attending the facilitated group video sessions were encouraged to discuss sexual agreements at home and return 1-2 weeks later for follow-up assessment. One-fourth of the 580 CNC returning reported a history of extramarital partners and/or a sexually transmitted infection (STI) prior to enrollment. More than 95% reported a friendly, supportive 15-60 min negotiation culminating in an agreement to remain monogamous or disclose sexual contacts and use condoms together until a repeat HIV test 30 days after an outside sexual exposure. Two-thirds of participants identified at least one threat to adherence of their agreements including alcohol use, financial pressures, travel, discord in the home, and post-partum or menstrual abstinence. CNC negotiated explicit sexual agreements to avoid exposure to HIV through concurrent partnerships and protect the spouse in the event of an outside sexual contact. Open communication was a consistent theme to facilitate mutual protective efforts. Long-term follow-up of HIV/STI incidence is ongoing to assess the impact of these agreements.Trial registration This sub-study is part of a trial retrospectively registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (Identifier: NCT02744586) on April 20, 2016.

Agreements, Behaviour, and Change: Sex Outside the Relationship in Male HIV-negative Partners in HIV Serodiscordant Relationships in Australia, Brazil, and Thailand

Male HIV serodiscordant couples have diverse relationship agreements regarding sex outside the relationship. We examined the relationship agreements as described by 343 male HIV-negative partners in HIV serodiscordant relationships in Australia, Brazil and Thailand participating in a multi-year cohort study. At baseline, 125 (34.1%) HIV-negative partners reported no agreement, 115 (33.5%) had a monogamous agreement, and 103 (37.9%) had an open agreement allowing sex outside the relationship. Relationship agreements were largely stable over time, with 76% of HIV-negative men reporting the same agreement across follow up, while changes were predominantly towards having an open agreement. Behaviour largely matched relationship agreements, and the predictors of breaking an agreement by having condomless anal intercourse (CLAI) with an outside partner were CLAI within the relationship (OR = 3.17, 95%CI: 1.64-6.14, p < 0.001) and PrEP use in the last three months (OR = 3.42, 95%CI: 1.48-7.92, p = 0.004). When considering HIV transmission risk for HIV-negative men in serodiscordant relationships, greater focus needs to be placed on sex that is occurring outside the relationship and the agreements that facilitate this.

Explicit Relationship Agreements and HIV Pre-exposure Prophylaxis Use by Gay and Bisexual Men in Relationships

Relationship agreements are important for HIV prevention among gay and bisexual men (GBM) in relationships, with research earlier in the HIV epidemic often finding that agreements specified monogamy or condom use with casual partners. There is evidence that HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) has shifted sexual practices among some men in relationships, such as allowing condomless sex with casual partners, but there has been little attention paid to relationship agreements among GBM who use PrEP. In this paper, we analyzed national, Australian, cross-sectional data from an online survey completed by non-HIV-positive GBM in 2021 (N = 1,185). Using logistic regression, we identified demographic characteristics, sexual practices and the types of relationship agreement that were associated with PrEP use among GBM in relationships. Using Pearson's chi-squared tests, we explored whether PrEP users in relationships reported similar sexual practices to PrEP users not in relationships. PrEP use among GBM in relationships was independently associated with older age, identifying as gay, being in a non-monogamous relationship, having a spoken (explicit) relationship agreement, having a primary HIV-negative partner taking PrEP or a primary partner living with HIV, reporting recent condomless casual sex, reporting an STI diagnosis in the past year, and knowing at least one other PrEP user. We found that PrEP users in relationships had similar sexual practices to PrEP users not in relationships. GBM in relationships who have casual sex and who meet PrEP suitability criteria may be good candidates for PrEP. Our findings suggest that explicit relationship agreements remain important for HIV prevention, and they support PrEP use among GBM in relationships.

Rate and Predictors of Ineffective HIV Protection in African Men Who Have Sex with Men Taking Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis

We investigated the rate and predictors of ineffective HIV protection in men who have sex with men (MSM) taking pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) in a prospective cohort study from November 2017 to November 2020 in Mali, Côte d'Ivoire, Burkina Faso, and Togo. MSM had to be 18 years or older and at high risk of HIV infection to participate. They also received a comprehensive sexual health prevention package, including PrEP, in community-based clinics as part of the cohort study. Using socio-behavioral/clinical data, HIV protection during their most recent anal intercourse with a male partner was categorized as effective or ineffective (i.e., incorrect PrEP adherence and no condom use). Seventeen percent (500/2839) of intercourses were ineffectively protected for the 520 study participants. Predictors of ineffective HIV protection included being an event-driven user with financial difficulties, having a high alcohol misuse score, and not being a member of a community association. PrEP programs in West Africa must be tailored to socially vulnerable MSM who struggle to adopt PrEP.

Characteristics of Agreements to have Condomless Anal Intercourse in the Presence of an Undetectable Viral Load Among HIV Serodiscordant Male Couples in Australia, Brazil and Thailand

The use of undetectable viral load (VL) to negotiate condomless anal intercourse (CLAI) in HIV serodiscordant male relationships has become more common as more data regarding the effectiveness of antiretroviral treatments for the prevention of HIV transmission has been described. We examined viral load agreements (VLAs) for condomless sex in the presence of an undetectable VL in 343 HIV serodiscordant male couples in Australia, Brazil and Thailand. Factors associated with having a VLA included having agreements for the HIV-positive partner to report his VL result (p < 0.001), agreeing that VL affects agreements about sexual practice (p < 0.001), the HIV-negative partner's perception of his partner's undetectable VL (p < 0.001), the couple's belief in the efficacy of undetectable VL in preventing HIV transmission (p < 0.001), and the couple engaging in CLAI with each other (p < 0.001). Over time, these agreements became more common although 49.3% of couples in the sample never had a viral load agreement. As these agreements become more common, further education is required to support male couples in using them safely.

A cluster randomized trial to reduce HIV risk from outside partnerships in Zambian HIV-Negative couples using a novel behavioral intervention, "Strengthening Our Vows": Study protocol and baseline data

BACKGROUND

Heterosexual couples contribute to most new HIV infections in areas of generalized HIV epidemics in sub-Saharan Africa. After Couples' Voluntary HIV Counseling and Testing (CVCT), heterosexual concordant HIV negative couples (CNC) in cohabiting unions contribute to approximately 47% of residual new infections in couples. These infections are attributed to concurrent sexual partners, a key driver of the HIV epidemic in Zambia.

METHODS/DESIGN

Ten Zambian government clinics in two of the largest cities were randomized in matched pairs to a Strengthening Our Vows (SOV) intervention or a Good Health Package (GHP) comparison arm. SOV addressed preventing HIV infection from concurrent partners and protecting spouses after exposures outside the relationship. GHP focused on handwashing; water chlorination; household deworming; and screening for hypertension, diabetes and schistosomiasis. CNC were referred from CVCT services in government clinics. Follow-up includes post-intervention questionnaires and outcome assessments through 60 months. Longitudinal outcomes of interest include self-report and laboratory markers of condomless sex with outside partners and reported sexual agreements. We present baseline characteristics and factors associated with study arm and reported risk using descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

The mean age of men was 32 and 26 for women. On average, couples cohabited for 6 years and had 2 children. Baseline analyses demonstrated some failures of randomization by study arm which will be considered in future primary analyses of longitudinal data. An HIV/STI risk factor composite was not different in the two study arms. Almost one-quarter of couples had an HIV risk factor at baseline.

DISCUSSION

In preparation for future biomedical and behavioral interventions in sub-Saharan Africa, it is critical to understand and decrease HIV risk within CNC.

Stronger Together: Results from a Randomized Controlled Efficacy Trial of a Dyadic Intervention to Improve Engagement in HIV Care Among Serodiscordant Male Couples in Three US Cities

Engagement in HIV care and a high level of antiretroviral therapy (ART) adherence for people living with HIV is crucial to treatment success and can minimize the population burden of the disease. Despite this, there is a critical gap in HIV prevention science around the development of interventions for serodiscordant male couples. This paper reports on the results of a randomized controlled trial to assess the efficacy of Stronger Together, a dyadic counseling intervention aimed at increasing engagement in and optimizing HIV care among serodiscordant male couples in Atlanta, GA, Boston, MA, and Chicago, IL. Between 2014 and 2017, 159 male serodiscordant couples (total N = 318) in Atlanta, GA, Boston, MA, and Chicago, IL were enrolled and equally randomized to either the Stronger Together intervention arm (a three-session dyadic intervention involving HIV testing and adherence counseling) or a standard of care (SOC) control arm. Couples completed individual study assessments via an audio computer assisted self-interviewing (ACASI) system at baseline, 6, 12 and 18 months. Primary outcomes included being prescribed and currently taking ART, and fewer missed doses of ART in the past 30 days; because the trial was not powered to examine viral suppression, we examined this as an exploratory outcome. Longitudinal data analysis was by an intention-to-treat approach. Participants ages ranged from 18 to 69 (mean = 35.9), and are predominantly white (77.5%), and college educated (68.4% earned a college degree or higher). Participants randomized to the Stronger Together arm had a significantly greater odds of being prescribed and currently taking ART over time than those in the SOC arm (at 12 months OR 2.75, 95%CI 1.35-4.67, p-value 0.020, and at 18 months OR 2.91, 95%CI 1.61-4.88, p-value 0.013). Similarly, those in the Stronger Together arm had a significantly lower odds of missing a dose of ART in the past 30 days over time compared to those in the SOC arm (at 12 months OR 0.28, 95%CI 0.09-0.81, p-value 0.019, and at 18 months OR 0.25, 95%CI 0.07-0.82, p-value 0.023). Among male couples in serodiscordant relationships, the Stronger Together intervention resulted in significantly improved HIV treatment outcomes at both 12 and 18 months of follow-up. This trial is the first to date to demonstrate evidence of efficacy for a dyadic counseling intervention and has the potential to fill a critical gap in secondary HIV prevention interventions for serodiscordant male couples.

Sexual Agreements and Intimate Partner Violence Among Male Couples in the U.S.: An Analysis of Dyadic Data

Prior research with male couples has focused on how sexual agreements can influence relationship dynamics, sexual risk taking, and health promoting behaviors. Little is known about the association between sexual agreements and the experience or perpetration of intimate partner violence (IPV) in this population. Our study sought to evaluate these associations using dyadic data from a sample of 386 male couples residing in the U.S. Both partners independently reported on their relationship characteristics, sexual agreements, and specific acts reflecting physical, emotional, controlling, and monitoring IPV in separate surveys. Participants were more likely to have experienced IPV in the past year if they were in a relationship for ≥ 3 years versus < 3 years (aOR = 1.62, 95% CI = 1.03-2.53). Among 278 couples who had formulated sexual agreements, men who concurred with their partners on being in an "open" relationship were less likely to have experienced IPV versus those in a "closed" relationship (aOR = 0.47, 95% CI = 0.25-0.89). However, participants were more likely to have experienced IPV if their partners believed they had previously broken their sexual agreement (aOR = 2.79, 95% CI = 1.03-7.52). The verbal explicitness and duration of sexual agreements were not associated with either experiencing or perpetrating IPV in the past year. However, increasing levels of depressive symptomatology were associated with a greater likelihood of both experiencing and perpetrating IPV. Our findings highlight the need to prioritize dyadic interventions for male couples that focus on skills building around enhancing mutual communication and negotiating sexual agreements to reduce IPV.

A Dyadic Perspective on Sexual Agreements Among Same-Sex Male Couples in the United States

Sexual agreements are an important HIV risk reduction strategy enacted by men in male-male partnerships. Greater levels of relationship quality have been associated with sexual agreement formation and adherence. However, current evidence supporting the associations between relationship quality and sexual agreements for male dyads is based primarily on the responses of just one partner. Understanding that relationship quality and decisions about sexual agreements are inherently influenced by both partners, the present analysis uses dyadic-level data to examine the sexual agreements among 199 HIV serodiscordant and seroconcordant male dyads (n = 398 individuals). Specifically, the analysis examines measures of love, trust, and conflict style as they relate to (1) the type of agreement established, (2) concordance in agreement reporting, (3) satisfaction with the agreement, and (4) broken agreements. A discrepancy in love between partners was associated with the type of agreement established, whether they reported the same agreement type, and whether one of the partners reported a broken agreement, but it was not associated with either partner's satisfaction with the agreement. A discrepancy in trust was associated with agreement concordance and agreement breaks, but it was not associated with the type of agreement established or satisfaction with the agreement. Lastly, a discrepancy in conflict style was associated with each of the agreement outcomes. Future research and intervention efforts should focus on understanding the behavioral and communication skills necessary for couples to make successful sexual agreements.

Gay Men's Relationship Agreements in the Era of Pre-exposure Prophylaxis: An Analysis of Australian Behavioural Surveillance Data

Using repeated, cross-sectional behavioural surveillance data from Australia, we assessed trends in relationship agreements and casual sex among HIV-negative and untested gay and bisexual men who had regular partners during 2013-2018. We conducted three analyses: (i) trends in relationship agreements and casual sex over time; (ii) bivariate comparisons of PrEP users and non-PrEP-users to identify factors associated with PrEP use; and (iii) multivariate logistic regression to identify factors independently associated with PrEP use. The analysis of trends over time included 21,593 men, from which a sub-sample (n = 3764) was used to compare PrEP users and non-PrEP-users. We found a large increase in agreements that allowed condomless sex with casual partners, particularly by PrEP users in relationships (nearly 40% of whom had such an agreement). A further 34% of PrEP users reported having casual condomless sex without an agreement that permitted that behaviour, while 13% of non-PrEP-users also reported condomless sex with casual partners without an agreement. PrEP use was independently associated with having agreements permitting condomless sex with casual partners, recent condomless sex with casual partners, having greater numbers of male partners, recent post-exposure prophylaxis use, having an HIV-positive regular male partner, and recent condomless sex with regular male partners. Our findings show a shift away from relationship agreements in which condomless sex was only sanctioned between regular partners.

The Pre-exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) Continuum of Care and Correlates to Initiation Among HIV-Negative Men Recruited at Miami Gay Pride 2018

While the national HIV infection rate is decreasing, the highest rates of infections continue among men who have sex with men (MSM), particularly minority MSM. It is important to understand attitudes, knowledge, and behaviors surrounding HIV prevention methods, such as pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP). In the present study, we created a snapshot of the PrEP continuum of care and identified participant demographic and sources of PrEP awareness factors that were associated with PrEP initiation. Data were collected using anonymous paper-based surveys employing a venue intercept procedure. A total of 188 HIV-negative men completed the survey at Miami Gay Pride 2018. Participants answered questions regarding demographics, PrEP use, and sources of PrEP awareness. The sample was majority Hispanic (55.4%), gay (83.0%), and single (57.7%). The constructed PrEP continuum revealed that a low proportion of those identified as PrEP naïve (n = 143) for HIV infection had PrEP interest (49/143). Moreover, among those who initiated PrEP (n = 45), a high proportion were retained in a PrEP program (37/45), with approximately half achieving medication adherence (25/45). Age group, PrEP knowledge, and source of PrEP awareness were all significantly associated with PrEP initiation. In areas with high HIV infection rates, studies like these offer crucial insight on how public health practitioners should proceed in the goal of decreasing HIV transmission rates. More research is needed to increase PrEP uptake and adherence.

Correlates of concurrent partnerships and patterns of condom use among men who have sex with men and transgender women in Peru

Background

In Peru, there is an ongoing high-incidence HIV epidemic among men who have sex with men (MSM) and transgender women (TW). Sexual concurrency, or having sex with a partner in between two acts of sex with another partner, may be a key factor in onward HIV transmission. In this study, we quantify concurrency, evaluate factors associated with concurrency, and assess condom use with concurrent partners among MSM and TW in Peru.

Methods

We conducted a secondary analysis of data from the 2011 Peruvian Biobehavioral Survey. Pearson’s Chi-squared test was used to identify individual-level characteristics associated with concurrency. We estimated the association between participant characteristics, concurrent partnerships, partnership type (stable vs. non-stable), and CLAI within the context of concurrent partnerships using multivariate and repeated-measure Poisson regression.

Results

3-month cumulative prevalence of concurrency was higher among TW compared to MSM (30.7% vs 25.2%, p = 0.014). Among those with concurrent stable and non-stable partners, 45% used condoms with both partners (95% CI: 40%-50%) and 30% preferentially had CLAI with the stable partner only (95%CI: 26%-35%). Factors associated with CLAI within the context of concurrent partnerships varied between MSM and TW.

Conclusions

Although concurrency is common among TW and MSM in Peru, patterns of concurrency and differential condom use may vary between TW and MSM. Future research may explore differential condom use with stable and non-stable partners to better understand behavioral factors that may alter vulnerability to HIV in TW compared to MSM.

Studying the Motivations Behind Sexual Agreements: A First Look at the Motivations Behind Agreement (MBA) Scale for Male Couples

Sexual agreements are ubiquitous among male couples, yet little is known about motivations behind agreements and their association with sexual risk for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). Qualitative interviews with 39 couples informed the development of the items in the Motivations Behind Agreement (MBA) scale. The scale was validated via exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) using quantitative data from two (790 and 882 men) independent samples of couples. The EFA yielded two factors: relationship quality enhancement motive (RQEM) and sex life enhancement motive (SLEM). The CFA indicated satisfactory global model data fit. Finally, in predicting sexual risk, RQEM and SLEM showed significant interactions with agreement type. For men with monogamous agreements, higher RQEM was associated with less condomless anal sex (CAS) with an outside partner of discordant or unknown serostatus (aOR = 0.15; 95% CI = 0.05, 0.46). For men with nonmonogamous agreements, higher RQEM was associated with less CAS (aOR = 0.76; 95% CI = 0.60, 0.97) while higher SLEM was associated with greater odds of CAS (aOR = 1.57; 95% CI = 1.18, 2.08). Men whose agreements were highly motivated by relationship enhancement were less likely to engage in sexual risk with outside partners regardless of agreement type. HIV-prevention interventions targeting male couples will benefit from incorporating an understanding of couples' agreement motivations.

Sexual Agreements: A Scoping Review of Measurement, Prevalence and Links to Health Outcomes

A sexual agreement is a mutual understanding between two partners regarding sexual and relational behaviors both within and outside of their relationship. Sexual agreements have been central to research and programming efforts around HIV prevention, primarily for male couples. A comprehensive scoping review of the primary literature on sexual agreements, including negotiated safety, was performed to identify what is known about sexual agreements among couples (n = 66). Results indicate a wide range of prevalence of agreements and measurements used to characterize sexual agreements. Findings also report associations between sexual agreements and health and relational outcomes. Several knowledge gaps were identified; specifically, the need to expand sexual agreements research beyond MSM populations and the need to better understand agreement breaks, break disclosure, and how variation in agreement categorization may impact reported prevalence. This review demonstrates the importance of broadening the evidence-base of sexual agreements research and programmatic focus.

The Prevalence and Correlates of Sexual Arrangements in a National Cohort of HIV-Negative Gay and Bisexual Men in the United States

Sexual agreements have received considerable attention as an aspect of dyadic functioning associated with HIV risk. To date, this research has primarily utilized convenience samples which overrepresented men from large urban areas and with higher HIV risk. The current study utilized a national cohort of 1061 HIV-negative gay and bisexual men recruited to be geographically diverse within the U.S. The sample included 531 (50.0%) men who identified as single. Of the 530 partnered men, 240 (45.3%) were monogamous; 238 (44.9%) were in open relationships (where sex with outside partners was permitted); and 52 (9.8%) were in monogamish relationships (where sex with outside partners was limited to instances where both primary partners were present). Regardless of urban (vs. non-urban) residence, men in monogamous relationships engaged in less anal sex generally and condomless anal sex (CAS) specifically with casual partners. Single men reported significantly more frequent anal sex with casual partners compared to open and monogamish men; however, there were no significant differences among these three groups with respect to CAS with casual partners. In multivariable models, monogamish men reported significantly more frequent marijuana use and alcohol consumption compared to all other groups. Urban (vs. non-urban) residence moderated associations between sexual arrangements and depression as well as the use of illicit drugs other than marijuana. These findings point to the need to better examine the potentially unique mechanisms which confer risk and resilience for gay male couples in urban versus non-urban settings. The observed association between sexual arrangements and substance use suggests interventions which facilitate the negotiation of sexual agreements may present an opportunity to engage in dyadic substance use intervention.

Negotiating sexual safety in the era of biomedical HIV prevention: relationship dynamics among male couples using pre-exposure prophylaxis

Up to two-thirds of new cases of HIV transmission between gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men in the USA are attributed to primary relationships. Understanding the relationship dynamics and sexual agreements of male-male couples can provide insight into HIV transmission patterns and prevention needs in this population. The daily use of antiretroviral pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is highly effective in preventing HIV, but its negotiation and use within social and intimate relationship contexts remain understudied. We conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews with 20 male couples (n = 40 men) in which at least one partner was either using or in the process of initiating PrEP. Congruent with a theoretical focus on social theories of relationships and negotiated risk, couples were interviewed about relationship dynamics, trust, communication and sexual health practices, including their perception and use of PrEP. Overall, we found that couples showed heightened trust and communication when establishing open, sexual agreements and demonstrated high awareness of sexual risks and health practices in the context of PrEP use. This study demonstrates how understanding relationship dynamics can better inform HIV prevention and sexual health promotion efforts for male couples at risk of HIV.

Project Stronger Together: Protocol to Test a Dyadic Intervention to Improve Engagement in HIV Care Among Sero-Discordant Male Couples in Three US Cities

BACKGROUND

An estimated one- to-two-thirds of new human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infections among US men who have sex with men (MSM) occur within the context of primary partnerships. Despite this fact, there remains a lack of prevention interventions that focus on male sero-discordant dyads. Interventions that provide male couples with skills to manage HIV risk, and to support each other towards active engagement in HIV prevention and care, are urgently needed.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this paper is to describe the protocol for an innovative dyadic intervention (Stronger Together) that combines couples' HIV testing and dyadic adherence counseling to improve treatment adherence and engagement in care among HIV sero-discordant male couples in the United States.

METHODS

The research activities involve a prospective randomized controlled trial (RCT) of approximately 165 venue- and clinic-recruited sero-discordant male couples (330 individuals: 165 HIV sero-negative and 165 HIV sero-positive). Couples randomized into the intervention arm receive couples' HIV counseling and testing plus dyadic adherence counseling, while those randomized to the control arm receive individual HIV counseling and testing. The study takes place in three cities: Atlanta, GA (study site Emory University); Boston, MA (study site The Fenway Institute); and Chicago, IL (study site Ann & Robert H. Lurie Children's Hospital of Chicago). Cohort recruitment began in 2015. Couples are followed prospectively for 24 months, with study assessments at baseline, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months.

RESULTS

Stronger Together was launched in August 2014. To date, 160 couples (97% of the target enrollment) have been enrolled and randomized. The average retention rate across the three sites is 95%. Relationship dissolution has been relatively low, with only 13 couples breaking up during the RCT. Of the 13 couples who have broken up, 10 of the 13 HIV-positive partners have been retained in the cohort; none of these HIV-positive partners have enrolled new partners into the RCT.

CONCLUSIONS

The intervention offers a unique opportunity for sero-discordant couples to support each other towards common HIV management goals by facilitating their development of tailored prevention plans via couples-based HIV testing and counseling, as well as problem-solving skills in Partner Strategies to Enhance Problem-solving Skills (STEPS).

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01772992; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01772992 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6szFBVk1R).

Home-Based HIV Testing and Counseling for Male Couples (Project Nexus): A Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

HIV prevalence remains high among men who have sex with men (MSM) in the United States, yet the majority of research has focused on MSM as individuals, not as dyads, and has discussed HIV risks primarily in the context of casual sex. Nexus is an online prevention program that combines home-based HIV testing and couples HIV testing and counseling (CHTC). It allows partners in dyadic MSM relationships to receive HIV testing and care in the comfort of their designated residence, via video-based chat. By using video-based technologies (eg, VSee video chat), male couples receive counseling and support from a remote online counselor, while testing for HIV at home.

OBJECTIVE

This randomized control trial (RCT) aims to examine the effects of video-based counseling combined with home-based HIV testing on couples' management of HIV risk, formation and adherence to explicit sexual agreements, and sexual risk-taking.

METHODS

The research implements a prospective RCT of 400 online-recruited male couples: 200 self-reported concordant-negative couples and 200 self-reported discordant couples. Couples in the control arm will receive one or two home-based HIV self-testing kits and will be asked to report their results via the study's website. Couples in the experimental arm will receive one or two home-based HIV self-testing kits and will conduct these tests together under the facilitation of a remotely located counselor during a prescheduled VSee-based video CHTC session. Study assessments are taken at baseline, as well as at 3- and 6-month follow-up sessions.

RESULTS

Project Nexus was launched in April 2016 and is ongoing. To date, 219 eligible couples have been enrolled and randomized.

CONCLUSIONS

Combining home-based HIV testing with video-based counseling creates an opportunity to expand CHTC to male couples who (1) live outside metro areas, (2) live in rural areas without access to testing services or LGBTQ resources, or (3) feel that current clinic-based testing is not for them (eg, due to fears of discrimination associated with HIV and/or sexuality).

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02335138; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02335138 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6qHxtNIdW).

Decisions About Testing for HIV While in a Relationship: Perspectives From an Urban, Convenience Sample of HIV-Negative Male Couples Who Have a Sexual Agreement

Many HIV-negative male couples establish a sexual agreement to help manage their HIV risk; however, less is known about their decisions about testing in this context. The present study examined whether male couples discussed HIV testing and explored their decisions about testing in the context of their sexual agreement at the individual- and couple-levels. Qualitative dyadic interview data were collected from 29 HIV-negative male couples with a sexual agreement who resided in Atlanta or Detroit; the sample was stratified by agreement type. Content analysis revealed male couples' decisions about HIV testing as routine, self-assurance, reliance and assumption on partner, beginning of relationship testers, and/or trust; decisions varied between partners and by agreement type. Findings suggest prevention efforts should help male couples integrate HIV testing into their sexual agreement that matches their agreement type and associated HIV-related risk behavior, and help shift their one-sided decisions about testing to a couple's mutually shared decision.

Negotiated safety - components, context and use: an integrative literature review

AIM

The aim of this study was to examine the components and use of negotiated safety in the context of HIV prevention and to identify reported factors associated with the concept.

BACKGROUND

There is an emerging interest in dyadic approaches to address HIV transmission. Although there are theoretical foundations for how interpersonal relationships influence individual behaviour, how these dyadic processes influence on health is still not wholly understood.

DESIGN

Integrative review of empirical and theoretical literature.

DATA SOURCES

The Cumulative Index for Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) MEDLINE and PsychINFO electronic databases were accessed.

REVIEW METHODS

Articles were read to gain a historical context of the term and identify varying interpretations of the concept. Factors warranting consideration in association with NS were identified and clinical and public health implications were noted.

RESULTS

Forty-eight studies were reviewed. Negotiated safety included the following components: (i) HIV sero-negative concordant men within a primary relationship; (ii) joint HIV screening and mutual disclosure of their HIV status; (iii) explicit relationship boundaries which establish either nonexclusively that allows for the dispensing of condoms within the primary relationship and consistent condom use for extra-dyadic sex; or dispensing of condoms within a primary partnership and exclusivity; and (iv) a breach clause that allows communication to re-establish the agreement if needed.

CONCLUSION

Negotiated safety is a prescriptive approach to HIV risk reduction among couples. Researchers and practitioners could benefit from promoting this approach to HIV prevention.

Sexual behavior and HIV risk among age-discrepant, same-sex male couples

Research has suggested that men who have sex with men and who have older sexual partners are at increased risk of HIV infection. However, while several studies have explored risk among men in age-discrepant non-primary partnerships, only two have explored age discrepancy and risk in primary same-sex male relationships. We used data from semi-structured in-depth interviews to explore sexual behaviour and HIV risk among 14 Black, white and interracial (Black/white) same-sex male couples with an age difference of 10 or more years. Most couples regularly used condoms, and sexual positioning tended to lead to lower risk for younger partners. Some serodiscordant couples abstained from anal sex, while others used seropositioning to avoid transmission within the relationship. Within some couples, older partners acted as mentors on HIV prevention and broader life lessons. Future studies should further explore the potential risks and benefits of large age differences in same-sex male primary relationships.

Perceived Challenges and Rewards of Forming a Sexual Agreement Among HIV-Negative Male Couples

Sexual agreements, explicit mutual understandings made between two partners about which sexual and related behaviors they agree to engage in within and/or outside of their relationship, are common among male couples. However, little is known about the perceived rewards and challenges partnered men face in the process of forming a sexual agreement. Such knowledge may be useful for the development of future HIV preventive and sexual health programs that encourage male couples to establish a sexual agreement in their relationship. By using qualitative dyadic data from a sample of 29 self-reported concordant HIV-negative male couples who had a sexual agreement, the present qualitative study sought to assess partnered men's perceived rewards and challenges of forming a sexual agreement in their relationship and examine whether both men in the couple concurred about their perceived rewards and challenges of forming a sexual agreement. Themes for perceived rewards were (1) being honest, (2) improving communication, (3) increasing understanding about expectations and permitted behaviors, (4) enhancing intimacy and relational bond, and (5) building trust. Themes for perceived challenges were: (1) stigma about having an open agreement; (2) awkwardness about the topic and talking about it; (3) jealousy; and (4) no perceived challenges. Few couples had both partners concur about their perceived rewards or challenges toward establishing a sexual agreement. The variety of perceived rewards and challenges highlight the need for tailoring given that a variety of factors may influence partnered men's establishment of a sexual agreement in their relationship.

Perceptions and Definitions of Power Within the Context of HIV-Negative Male Couples' Relationships

Examining dynamics within relationships is critical for development of effective HIV prevention interventions for male couples. The dynamic of power has received little attention in research with male couples, though power has been reported to affect HIV risk among heterosexual couples. To help address this knowledge gap, the present cross-sectional analysis used mixed methods with dyadic data from 142 HIV-negative male couples to (1) assess partnered men's perception of who has the most power in their relationship and why, (2) examine whether partners concur about who has the most power and their reasoning for this selection, and (3) assess whether male couples' concurrence about who has the most power is associated with their engagement of condomless anal sex within and/or outside the relationship, type of relationship, and aspects of their sexual agreement. Individual- and couple-level responses about who has the most power were quantitatively assessed, whereas for why, their responses were coded qualitatively. Fifty-six percent of couples concurred about who has the most power in their relationship and of these, many said it was equal. Regarding why, themes of responses ranged from "compromise" and "shared responsibility" for those who concurred about who has the most power versus "dominant/compliant personality" and "money" among the couples who disagreed about who has the most power in their relationship. Concordance about who has the most power was only associated with condomless anal sex within the relationship. Further research is warranted to examine how power may affect other dynamics of male couples' relationships and risk-related behaviors.

Illuminating the Context and Circumstances of Male Couples Establishing a Sexual Agreement in Their Relationship

A sexual agreement is an explicit mutual understanding made between two partners about which sexual and relational behaviors they agree to engage in within and/or outside of their relationship. Factors that prompt male couples to form a sexual agreement and under what circumstances remain underinvestigated, yet are important considerations for development of couples-based sexual health and HIV prevention interventions. By using thematic analysis with qualitative dyadic data from a convenience sample of 29 HIV-negative male couples, the present study sought to describe the timing and investigate the context and circumstances that led male couples to establish a sexual agreement in their relationship at both the individual and couple levels, and by agreement type. Themes identified for when a sexual agreement was formed included within the first 6 months, and after 6 months in the relationship. Themes related to context and circumstances of couples' sexual agreement formation were as follows: (a) desire for sexual exploration, (b) arisen circumstances or events with other men, (c) influences from past relationship(s) and/or other couples (i.e., peers), (d) to protect against HIV, and (e) purposeful conversations versus understood. Findings suggest HIV prevention efforts should include skill-building exercises to help improve communication and promote sex positivity within male couples' relationships.

Relationship Power, Sociodemographics, and Their Relative Influence on Sexual Agreements Among Gay Male Couples

Men who have sex with men (MSM) in primary relationships engage in condomless sex both within and outside their relationships and a majority of HIV transmission risk may actually occur within primary relationships. Sexual agreements regarding non-monogamy are a critical component to understanding HIV prevention in male couples. Relationship factors have been associated with how sexual agreements function and power is one dyadic construct likely to affect couple's maintenance of non-monogamy agreements. Multilevel modeling was used in a cross-sectional study of gay male couples (N = 566 couples) to examine associations between partners' demographic characteristics traditionally used to define relationship power, a scale of decision-making power, and outcomes related to sexual agreements, including investment, agreement breaks, and break disclosure. Results indicated that decision-making power relative to one's partner was not associated with any agreement outcome, contrary to hypotheses. However, controlling for decision-making power, demographic bases of power were variably associated with sexual agreements' functioning. Younger partners were less invested in and more frequently broke their agreements. Lower-earning partners broke their agreements more frequently, but also disclosed breaks more often. White men in white-minority relationships broke their agreement more often than their partners. Concordant HIV-positive couples were less invested in their agreements and HIV-positive men disclosed breaks more frequently. HIV prevention efforts for same-sex couples must attend to the social, developmental, and cultural influences that affect their agreements around non-monogamy.

Social and Behavioural Correlates of HIV Testing Among Australian Gay and Bisexual Men in Regular Relationships

In this study we sought to identify the social and behavioural characteristics of Australian gay and bisexual men who had and had not tested for HIV during their current relationship. The results were based on 2012 and 2013 data collected from ongoing cross-sectional and community-based surveys held in six Australian states and territories. One thousand five hundred and sixty-one non-HIV-positive men reported that they were in a primary relationship. The majority of gay and bisexual men in primary relationships had tested for HIV during the relationship (73.4 %). Among men who had not tested during the relationship, almost half of these men had never tested for HIV. As untested men within relationships are potentially at risk of acquiring and transmitting HIV to their partners unknowingly, it is important to promote HIV testing to these men.

Factors associated with unprotected anal sex with multiple non-steady partners in the past 12 months: results from the European Men-Who-Have-Sex-With-Men Internet Survey (EMIS 2010)

BACKGROUND

Practising unprotected anal intercourse (UAI) with high numbers of partners is associated with increased risk for acquiring and transmitting HIV and other sexually transmitted infections. Our aim was to describe factors associated with UAI with multiple partners in a large sample of MSM from 38 European countries recruited for an online survey in 2010.

METHODS

Data are from the European Men-Who-Have-Sex-With-Men Internet Survey (EMIS). The analysis was restricted to men who reported any anal sex with a non-steady partner in the past 12 months, and who were either never diagnosed with HIV, or who had been diagnosed with HIV more than 12 months ago, reported a detectable viral load and did not exclusively serosort (n = 91,477). Multivariable logistic regression was used to compare men reporting UAI with four or more (4+) non-steady partners to two comparison groups: a) no UAI with non-steady partners, and b) UAI with 1-3 non-steady partners.

RESULTS

Overall, 9.6% of the study population reported UAI with 4+ partners in the past 12 months. In both models, factors consistently associated with this behaviour were: having been diagnosed with HIV, lower educational levels, use of nitrite inhalants, drugs associated with sex and parties, or erectile dysfunction drugs in the past 4 weeks, using sex-on-site venues in the past 4 weeks, buying or selling sex in the past 12 months, having experienced physical violence due to sexual attraction to men in the past 12 months, reporting sexual happiness, being out to all or almost all of one's acquaintances, and knowing that ART reduces HIV transmissibility.

CONCLUSIONS

Effective antiretroviral treatment drastically reduces HIV transmission for men diagnosed with HIV, irrespective of partner numbers. Apart from reducing partner numbers or increasing condom use no other recommendations are currently in place to reduce the risk of HIV acquisition and onward transmission for HIV-negative men practicing UAI with multiple partners. A range of factors were identified as associated with UAI with four or more partners which allow the strengthening and targeting of prevention strategies to reduce HIV transmission risks resulting from condomless anal intercourse with multiple partners.

Willingness to Act upon Beliefs about 'Treatment as Prevention' among Australian Gay and Bisexual Men

HIV ‘treatment as prevention’ (TasP) is highly effective in reducing HIV transmission in serodiscordant couples. There has been little examination of gay and bisexual men’s attitudes towards TasP, particularly regarding men’s willingness to act on beliefs about TasP. We conducted an online cross-sectional survey of Australian men in late 2012 to investigate knowledge and beliefs about new developments in HIV prevention. Amongst 839 men (mean age 39.5 years), men tended to disagree that TasP was sufficiently effective to justify reduced condom use, although HIV-positive men had more favourable attitudes. Only a minority of men were aware of any evidence for TasP; and one-quarter incorrectly believed that evidence for the effectiveness of TasP already existed for the homosexual population. One-fifth (20.5%) of men reported that they would be willing to have condomless anal intercourse with an opposite-status sexual partner when the HIV-positive partner was taking HIV treatments. Factors independently associated with such willingness were: HIV-positive serostatus, reporting any serodiscordant or serononconcordant condomless anal intercourse with a regular male partner in the previous six months, reporting any condomless anal intercourse with a casual male partner in the previous six months, and having greater beliefs in the effectiveness of TasP. This indicated that the men most willing to rely on TasP to prevent transmission were already engaging in higher risk practices. Biomedical HIV prevention represents a rapidly changing environment with new research as well as community and policy responses emerging at a fast pace. For men with serodiscordant sexual partners to successfully apply TasP to reducing transmission risk, more support and education is needed to enable better utilisation of TasP in specific relational and sexual contexts.

Sexual agreements and perception of HIV prevalence among an online sample of partnered men who have sex with men

Stemming from recent evidence that between one- and two-thirds of new HIV transmissions among men who have sex with men (MSM) occur within main partnerships, research and programmatic efforts have begun to recognize the role of the male-male dyad in shaping HIV risk. Central to this new focus has been studies detailing the presence of sexual agreements, which provide guidelines governing permissions around sex with partners outside of the relationship. Using a Facebook-recruited sample of US-partnered MSM (n = 454), this study examines the associations between reporting of sexual agreements and perceptions of HIV prevalence among male sex partners, friends, and local and national MSM populations. Men who perceived that 10-20 % (OR 6.18, 95 % CI 1.28-29.77) and >20 % of their male sex partners were HIV positive (OR 2.68, 95 % CI 1.02-7.08) had significantly higher odds of reporting having an open agreement with their current main partner than men who perceived that less than 10 % of their male sex partners were HIV positive. Partnered men with open sexual agreements may have more sexual partners than those who report monogamy, possibly leading to heightened perceptions of HIV risk, which may result in reporting of perceptions of greater local HIV prevalence. Additionally, men who have made agreements with their partners may have done so due to concerns about HIV risks, and may also be more aware of increased risks of HIV infection, or may have greater knowledge of HIV prevalence through discussions of serostatus with sex partners. Attention is needed to develop prevention efforts, such as toolkits and resources that enable men to form sexual agreements that are based on comprehensive knowledge of the potential risks for acquisition of HIV.

A scoping review and thematic analysis of social and behavioural research among HIV-serodiscordant couples in high-income settings

BACKGROUND

While HIV incidence has stabilized in many settings, increases in health and wellbeing among many people living with HIV/AIDS suggest that the number of HIV-serodiscordant relationships is growing. Given the deficit of reviews addressing social and behavioural characteristics of HIV-serodiscordant couples within high-income settings, our objective was to understand the scope of the published literature, identify evidence gaps, and suggest future research needs.

METHODS

Ten electronic databases were searched. Studies were included if they were reported in English, used primary data, were from the combination antiretroviral (cART) era (>1996), reported on social or behavioural aspects, included any fraction of primary (i.e., stable) relationships, and were conducted in high-income settings. Studies that identified their unit of analysis as either the dyad or individual member of the couple were included. Studies were coded according to a thematic framework.

RESULTS

Included studies (n = 154) clustered into eight themes: risk behaviours (29%), risk management (26%), reproductive issues (12%), relationship quality (9%), serostatus disclosure (7%), adherence to antiretroviral therapy (7%), vulnerability (5%), and social support (3%). The proportion of studies conducted among heterosexual couples, same-sex male couples, and mixed cohorts were 42%, 34%, and 24%, respectively. Most studies (70%) were conducted in the United States, 70% of all studies were quantitative (including interventions), but only one-third were focused on couples (dyads) where both partners are recruited to a study. Over 25% of studies focused on sexual risk among same-sex male couples.

CONCLUSIONS

Future research efforts should focus on the interrelationship of risk management strategies and relationship quality, social determinants of health and wellbeing, HIV testing, vulnerable populations, reproductive issues among same-sex couples, disclosure of serodiscordant status to social networks, dyadic studies, population-based studies, and interventions to support risk management within couples. Additional population-based studies and studies among marginalized groups would be helpful for targeting research and interventions to couples that are most in need. As HIV-positive partners are typically the link to services and research, innovative ways are needed for reaching out to HIV-negative partners. Our review suggests that significantly more research is needed to understand the social and behavioural contexts of HIV-serodiscordant relationships.

Relationship Agreements and Willingness to Participate in Couples HIV Testing and Counseling Among Heterosexuals in the U.S

Couples HIV testing and counseling (CHTC) has been used for more than 20 years in African settings and more recently among men who have sex with men in the United States, but little is known about willingness of heterosexuals in the U.S. to use CHTC. We conducted an online survey of heterosexuals in sexual relationships to assess willingness to use CHTC and willingness to discuss relationship agreements within a couples counseling session. We found moderate levels of willingness to use CHTC and somewhat higher levels of willingness to discuss relationship agreements in a couples counseling session. The most frequently cited reason people were not willing was that they did not perceive themselves or their partners to be at risk for HIV. These results will be useful in planning for CHTC implementation for heterosexuals in the U.S.

Between and within couple-level factors associated with gay male couples' investment in a sexual agreement

Sexual agreements are common among gay male couples, and between one-third and two-thirds of gay men acquire HIV while in a same-sex relationship. Studies have assessed whether agreements could be used for HIV prevention yet additional research is needed. By using dyadic data collected from 361 U.S. gay male couples, the present cross-sectional study sought to assess whether certain between and within couple-level relationship characteristics predict a partner's value in, commitment to, and satisfaction with an agreement. On average, couples with higher levels of constructive communication and relationship satisfaction and commitment were associated with partners who had higher levels of investment in the agreement. Within the couple, differences in commitment and investment of the relationship were also found to be negatively associated with partners' investment toward an agreement. Implications are discussed for how sexual agreements may be used to develop new HIV prevention efforts for gay male couples.

Gay men's HIV risk reduction practices: The influence of epistemic communities in HIV social and behavioral research

Since the mid-1980s, Australian social researchers have investigated the sexual practices of gay men, describing those that protect men from HIV or put them at risk of infection. Ground-breaking (and controversial) publications have highlighted a variety of ways in which gay men protect themselves and their partners, including condom use and non-condom-based risk reduction strategies. HIV social research in Australia has been heavily influenced by a distinctive network of experts or epistemic community with shared principles and beliefs and a commitment to influencing policy and practice. This epistemic community has articulated a 'social public health' view of HIV that emphasises partnership, agency, understanding practices and reflexivity. This approach has clashed with those of other epistemic communities, notably around ideas of relapse and unsafe sex. This article uses the examples of negotiated safety and serosorting to illustrate this Australian epistemic community's approach to HIV risk reduction among gay men.

Health, trust, or "just understood": explicit and implicit condom decision-making processes among black, white, and interracial same-sex male couples

Among gay and bisexual men, primary partners are a leading source of HIV infection. Trust, intimacy, and advancements in HIV treatment may impact same-sex male (SSM) couples' decisions to engage in unprotected anal intercourse (UAI). This qualitative study explored how Black, White and interracial couples discussed, and made decisions regarding condoms. Qualitative interviews were conducted with 48 SSM couples in the New York and San Francisco metropolitan areas. Stratified purposive sampling was used to include Black (n = 16), White (n = 17), and interracial (Black-White) (n = 15) couples. Twenty-six couples were concordant HIV-negative and 22 were HIV-discordant. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, coded, and analyzed using a grounded theory approach. Some couples described explicit processes, which involved active discussion, while others described implicit processes, where condom-use decisions occurred without any explicit discussion. These processes also differed by race and HIV status. Black couples tended to report condom-use as "just understood." White, HIV-discordant couples decided not to use condoms, with some identifying the HIV-positive partner's suppressed viral load and high CD4 count as deciding factors. After an unplanned episode of UAI, White, HIV-negative couples tended to discontinue condom use while Black HIV-negative couples decided to revert to using condoms. HIV prevention efforts focused on same-sex, male couples must consider the explicit/implicit nature of condom decision-making processes. Understanding differences in these processes and considering relationship dynamics, across race and HIV status, can promote the development of innovative couple-level, HIV prevention interventions.

Incorporating couples-based approaches into HIV prevention for gay and bisexual men: opportunities and challenges

Thirty years after the beginning of the HIV epidemic, gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (collectively called MSM) bear a disproportionate burden of HIV in the United States and continue to acquire a distressingly high number and proportion of new infections. Historically, HIV prevention for MSM has been focused on individual-level behavior change, rarely intervening with MSM as part of a couple. Yet, an estimated 33–67% of HIV infections among MSM are acquired from primary sexual partners, suggesting that work with MSM as couples could be an important contributor to prevention. Given the emergence of high impact combination HIV prevention, it is timely to consider how work with the broad variety of male couples can improve both personal and community health. Couples HIV testing and counseling for MSM is an important advance for identifying men who are unaware that they are HIV-positive, identifying HIV-discordant couples, and supporting men who want to learn their HIV status with their partner. Once men know their HIV status, new advances in biomedical prevention, which can dramatically reduce risk of HIV transmission or acquisition, allow men to make prevention decisions that can protect themselves and their partners. This paper highlights the present-day challenges and benefits of using a couples-based approach with MSM in the era of combination prevention to increase knowledge of HIV status, increase identification of HIV discordant couples to improve targeting prevention services,and support mutual disclosure of HIV status.

Who‘s cheating? Agreements about sexual exclusivity and subsequent concurrent partnering in Australian heterosexual couples

Background Concurrent relationships are a driver of generalised epidemics of sexually transmissible infections (STIs). In Australia, explicit negotiation of agreements about sex outside regular relationships has been recommended in health promotion for gay men but not for heterosexuals. Objective: To ascertain the annual incidence of concurrency among people in ongoing male–female relationships according to their reported expectations of exclusivity. Methods: In a national cohort recruited by household random digit dialling in 2004–05, people aged 16–64 years completed computer-assisted telephone interviews including questions about expectations of sexual exclusivity, discussion and agreements. A year later, those in ongoing sexual relationships (5323 people) were asked about sexual partner numbers in the past year. Results: The huge majority (96%) expected sexual exclusivity of themselves and their partner. However, only 48% of men and 64% of women had discussed the matter and explicitly agreed. Older respondents were less likely to report discussion. Only 1% reported mutually nonexclusive (‘open’) relationships. A year later, 93% of respondents were still in the same relationship, among whom 4% of men and 2% of women had had sex outside the relationship. Those with agreements that one or both partners could have sex with others were more likely to do so, but the majority of respondents who had sex with someone else were in relationships that were explicitly or implicitly expected to be exclusive. Conclusions: Sexual health promotion should stress the importance of STI testing and establishing agreements about exclusivity before condoms are abandoned in new relationships.

Anal sex role segregation and versatility among men who have sex with men: EXPLORE Study

Anal sex role patterns and correlates during unprotected anal sex were examined longitudinally among HIV-negative men who have sex with men. Nearly 9.6% were exclusively receptive, 16.7% exclusively insertive, and 63.0% versatile. Versatility was more likely with primary and HIV-negative/unknown status partners and among younger men and substance users but less likely among Blacks and with higher number of partners. Exclusively receptive role was more likely with HIV-negative/unknown status partners and among younger men and substance users but less likely with higher number of partners. Examining anal sex role patterns helps understand the factors that drive the epidemic among men who have sex with men.

Which gay men would increase their frequency of HIV testing with home self-testing?

Many Australian gay men do not get tested for HIV at the recommended frequency. Barriers to HIV testing may be reduced by the availability of home HIV self-testing (HHST). An online cross-sectional questionnaire was conducted with 2,306 Australian gay men during 2009. Multivariate logistic regression identified factors associated with being likely to increase testing frequency if HHST was available, among previously-tested and never-tested men. Among 2,018 non-HIV-positive men, 83.9% had been tested. Two-thirds indicated they would test more often if HHST was available irrespective of previous testing history. In multivariate analysis, independent predictors of increased testing frequency with HHST included preferences for more convenient testing, not having to see a doctor when testing and wanting immediate results among all men, as well as not being from an Anglo-Australian background and recent unprotected anal sex with casual partners among previously-tested men only. The majority of gay men report that being able to test themselves at home would increase their frequency of HIV testing.

Characteristics and allowed behaviors of gay male couples' sexual agreements

Research has shown that gay male couples' sexual agreements may affect their risk for HIV. Few U.S. studies have collected dyadic data nationally from gay male couples to assess what sexual behaviors they allow to occur by agreement type and the sequence of when certain behaviors occur within their relationships. In our cross-sectional study, dyadic data from a convenience sample of 361 male couples were collected electronically throughout the United States by using paid Facebook ads. Findings revealed that couples discussed their HIV status before having unprotected anal intercourse (UAI) but established their agreement some time after having UAI. About half of the couples (N = 207) concurred about having an agreement. Among these couples, 58% concurred about explicitly discussing their agreement, 84% concurred about having the same type of agreement, and 54% had both men adhering to it. A variety of sexual behaviors were endorsed and varied by agreement type. Concordance about aspects of couples' agreements varied, suggesting the need to engage couples to be more explicit and detailed when establishing and communicating about their agreements. The allowed behaviors and primary reasons for establishing and breaking sexual agreements further highlight the need to bolster HIV prevention for gay male couples.

Relationship dynamics as predictors of broken agreements about outside sexual partners: implications for HIV prevention among gay couples

Agreements about sex with outside partners are common among gay couples, and breaks in these agreements can be indicative of HIV risk. Using longitudinal survey data from both partners in 263 HIV-negative and -discordant gay couples, we investigate whether relationship dynamics are associated with broken agreements. Twenty-three percent of respondents reported broken agreements. Partners with higher levels of trust, communication, commitment, and social support were significantly less likely to report breaking their agreement. Promoting positive relationship dynamics as part of HIV prevention interventions for gay couples provides the opportunity to minimize the occurrence of broken agreements and, ultimately, reduce HIV risk.

Relationship factors associated with gay male couples' concordance on aspects of their sexual agreements: establishment, type, and adherence

Factors associated with gay male couples' concordance on aspects of sexual agreements remain understudied. The present study examined which relationship factors, self-reports of UAI, and patterns of HIV testing may be associated with men who were concordant about having a sexual agreement, the same type of sexual agreement, and adhering to their sexual agreement with their main partner. Various recruitment strategies were used to collect dyadic data from 142 gay male couples. Concordance on aspects of sexual agreements varied within the sample. Results indicated that relationship satisfaction was significantly associated with couples who were concordant about having and adhering to their sexual agreement. Predictability and faith of trusting a partner, and value in one's sexual agreement were also positively associated with couples' adhering to their sexual agreement. More research is needed to better understand how relationship dynamics, including sexual agreements, affect HIV risk among gay male couples in the U.S.

Inner contradictions among men who bareback

Barebacking, or intentional unprotected anal intercourse when HIV transmission can occur, emerged as a descriptive term in the 1990s, and marked greater acceptance by gay and bisexual men of dispensing with condom use under certain circumstances. In an exploratory study of men who used Internet sites to meet partners and reported recent episodes of barebacking, respondents outlined numerous strategies they deployed to avoid HIV infection instead of universal condom use. However, in interviews many participants acknowledged uneasiness with the flaws in their chosen strategies, and the contradiction between their urgent desire to remain HIV-free and their sexual practices. For some, the dissonance between the conflicting cognitions could be resolved through self-justification, mental compartmentalization, or invincibility beliefs so that barebacking could continue. For this subpopulation, continued reiteration of cognitive-based prevention messages has the potential to reinforce rather than undermine their attachment to inadequate strategies for disease avoidance.

Behavioral and serologic survey of men who have sex with men in Beijing, China: implication for HIV intervention

We assessed HIV prevalence and associated behaviors and risk factors among men who have sex with men (MSM) in Beijing, China. Five hundred MSM were recruited for a biological and behavioral survey using respondent-driven sampling (RDS) in 2009. Serologic specimens were tested for markers of HIV and syphilis infection. A computer-assisted personal interview (CAPI) administered questionnaire gathered information including demographic characteristics, sexual behaviors, HIV testing, and social norms concerning condom use. The adjusted HIV prevalence was 8.0%, syphilis 22.0%. HIV testing and disclosure was low; only 39.3% had HIV tested in the past 12 months, 49.7% knew their own HIV status and 22.8% knew their last male partner's HIV status. HIV infection was associated with syphilis, ever having sex with a woman, not knowing the HIV status of the most recent male partner, and never buying condoms in the past 12 months. Stronger endorsement of positive social norms around condom use strongly and predicted lower prevalence of HIV infection. Compared to surveys of similar design in the recent past, HIV continues to spread rapidly among Beijing's MSM. Our results identify points of intervention that, if addressed in time, may still alter the course of the epidemic including the promotion of HIV testing and partner disclosure, syphilis control and particularly changing social norms around condom use.

Relationship factors associated with HIV risk among a sample of gay male couples

More HIV prevention research is needed to better understand how relationship factors may affect sexual risk behaviors among gay male couples. Our cross-sectional study collected dyadic data from 144 gay male couples to examine which relationship factors and characteristics were associated with men having UAI with a secondary sex partner. We targeted male couples by using a variety of recruitment strategies. Multilevel random-effects logistic regression modeling was used to examine which factors were predictive of men in gay couples who had UAI with a secondary sex partner. Analyses revealed that men were less likely to have had UAI with a secondary sex partner if they reported being in a strictly monogamous relationship, receiving an HIV test within the previous 3 months, and being committed to their sexual agreement. Future HIV prevention interventions must consider how relationship factors may influence sexual risk behaviors among gay male couples.

Reasons for not HIV testing, testing intentions, and potential use of an over-the-counter rapid HIV test in an internet sample of men who have sex with men who have never tested for HIV

BACKGROUND

Correlates of main reasons for not HIV testing, HIV testing intentions, and potential use of an over-the-counter rapid HIV test (OTCRT) among men who have sex with men who have never tested for HIV (NTMSM) are unknown.

METHODS

We evaluated these correlates among 946 NTMSM from 6 US cities who participated in an internet-based survey in 2007.

FINDINGS

Main reasons for not testing were low perceived risk (32.2%), structural barriers (25.1%), and fear of testing positive (18.1%). Low perceived risk was associated with having fewer unprotected anal intercourse (UAI) partners and less frequent use of the internet for HIV information; structural barriers were associated with younger age and more UAI partners; fear of testing positive was associated with black and Hispanic race/ethnicity, more UAI partners, and more frequent use of the internet for HIV information. Strong testing intentions were held by 25.9% of all NTMSM and 14.8% of those who did not test because of low perceived risk. Among NTMSM who were somewhat unlikely, somewhat likely, and very likely to test for HIV, 47.4%, 76.5%, and 85.6% would likely use an OTCRT if it was available, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Among NTMSM who use the internet, main reasons for not testing for HIV vary considerably by age, race/ethnicity, UAI, and use of the internet for HIV information. To facilitate HIV testing of NTMSM, programs should expand interventions and services tailored to address this variation. If approved, OTCRT might be used by many NTMSM who might not otherwise test for HIV.

HIV testing, gay community involvement and internet use: social and behavioural correlates of HIV testing among Australian men who have sex with men

A significant minority of Australian men who have sex with men (MSM) have never been tested for HIV and many men do not test as often as recommended. Using data from 1770 HIV-negative and untested MSM collected in a national, online survey, we compared men who had never tested for HIV with those who had tested over 12 months ago and men who had tested over 12 months ago with those that had tested in the past year. Two multivariate logistic regression models were constructed. Compared with men tested over 12 months ago, untested men were younger, less educated, less likely to have unprotected anal intercourse with a regular male partner, less likely to have sought advice from a doctor, nurse or community organisation, more likely to expect HIV-negative disclosure, had fewer gay friends and spent more time using social networking websites. Compared with men who had tested over 12 months ago, men who had tested within the last year were younger, more likely to expect HIV-negative disclosure and disclose to casual partners, more likely to have sought advice from a doctor or nurse, had attended gay pools, gyms or beaches and had more gay friends and more male sex partners. Our findings suggest that the Internet and sex education in schools are important ways to promote HIV testing to untested MSM. Testing reinforcement messages delivered through gay community outreach and primary care will reach previously tested MSM.

Sexual agreement classifications for gay and bisexual men and implications for harm reduction HIV prevention

HIV prevention educators frequently encourage gay and bisexual men (GBM) to negotiate condom use prior to sexual engagement. Identifying groups of GBM based on their presexual agreements can aid efforts to tailor interventions. Using cross-sectional data from 1,188 GBM who reported having sex with a nonprimary sex partner in the 90 days prior to the survey, the authors identified presexual agreement patterns. For both HIV-positive and HIV-negative GBM, two groups existed: men agreeing to no anal sex and men agreeing to anal sex with condoms. Among HIV-negative participants, there was a group agreeing to anal sex without specifying condom use. Among HIV-positive participants, there was a group agreeing to anal sex without condoms; this was the largest group of HIV-positive participants. Despite a presexual agreement to use condoms, substance use during sex increased the risk of unprotected anal sex. Suggestions for applying harm reduction to HIV prevention based on agreement classifications are discussed.