Article Text

other Versions

PDF
More than just anal sex: the potential for STI transmission among men visiting sex on premises venues
  1. Chee Wun Phang
  1. School of Population Health, University of Melbourne, Australia
    1. Jane Hocking
    1. School of Population Health, University of Melbourne, Australia
      1. Christopher K Fairley
      1. School of Population Health, University of Melbourne and Melbourne Sexual Health Centre, Australia
        1. Catriona Bradshaw
        1. School of Population Health, University of Melbourne and Melbourne Sexual Health Centre, Australia
          1. Peter Hayes
          1. Melbourne Sexual Health Centre, Australia
            1. Marcus Y Chen (mchen{at}mshc.org.au)
            1. School of Population Health, University of Melbourne and Melbourne Sexual Health Centre, Australia

              Abstract

              Objectives: This study aimed to obtain detailed data on the frequency of sexual practices among men who had sex with men (MSM) at sex on premises venues (SOPVs) and to compare this with their sexual practices outside SOPVs.

              Methods: A cross-sectional, survey was undertaken of MSM at 6 SOPVs between December 2006 and March 2007.

              Results: Of 604 men approached, 200 (33%) participated. Men reported sexual contact with a median of 2 other men (range: 0-28). Receptive and insertive anal intercourse was reported by 19.5% and 34.0% respectively, and was unprotected in 2.5% and 6.0%. The frequency of other practices included: unprotected insertive and receptive penile-anal touching or rubbing without penetration, or "nudging", (26.5% and 20.0%); unprotected, transient insertive and receptive anal intercourse, or "dipping", (6.0% and 5.0%); and insertive and receptive anal fingering (38.5% and 32.5%). About 40% of men who "anal sex". Compared with their practices with casual male partners outside SOPVs, men having sex at SOPVs were less likely to have receptive oral intercourse with ejaculation (OR 0.4 (95%CI: 0.2-1.0), p=0.04) and unprotected receptive anal intercourse (OR 0.3 (95%CI: 0.1-0.8), p=0.01), but more likely to have group sex (OR 2.0 (95%CI: 1.1-3.6), p=0.03).

              Conclusions: Substantial penile-anal contact not involving anal intercourse occurred at SOPVs, and may explain anal infections in the absence of reported anal sex. Some higher risk practices were reported more frequently with male partners outside of these venues than with partners within SOPVs.

              • Homosexuality
              • Sexual behavior
              • Sexually transmitted diseases

              Statistics from Altmetric.com

              Request permissions

              If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.