Table 3

Determinants of time between consecutive consultations among men who have sex with men aged 14–89 years, who tested multiple times at STI clinics in the Netherlands between 1 June 2014 and 31 December 2015; Cox Prentice-Williams-Peterson gap-time models, stratified for inconsistent and consistent testers

Inconsistent testersConsistent (6-monthly) testers
CrudeAdjustedCrudeAdjusted
HR (95% CI)HR† (95% CI)HR (95% CI)HR†¶ (95% CI)
Number of sex partners in the past six months
 0–21111
 3–40.87 (0.81–0.93)0.87** (0.81–0.94)1.10 (1.02–1.19)1.10* (1.01–1.19)
 5–90.91 (0.85–0.98)0.92* (0.86–0.99)1.11 (1.03–1.20)1.11* (1.03–1.20)
 10+0.92 (0.86–0.98)0.93* (0.86–0.99)1.19 (1.11–1.27)1.17** (1.08–1.26)
Condom use at last contact ‡
 No11
 Yes0.96 (0.92–1.00)0.96 (0.91–1.00)
Received partner notification
 No1111
 Yes1.15 (1.09–1.22)1.11** (1.05–1.18)1.44 (1.35–1.53)1.32** (1.23–1.40)
Reported STI symptoms
 No1111
 Yes1.15 (1.09–1.21)1.09** (1.04–1.16)1.40 (1.32–1.48)1.24** (1.16–1.31)
Known HIV positive
 No1111
 Yes1.15 (1.08–1.22)1.10* (1.03–1.17)1.42 (1.33–1.51)1.31** (1.21–1.40)
Commercial sex worker‡
 No11
 Yes1.01 (0.86–1.20)1.29 (1.12–1.49)
Client of commercial sex worker§
 No11
 Yes0.97 (0.85–1.11)1.11 (0.95–1.30)
Positive chlamydia diagnosis§
 No11
 Yes0.95 (0.88–1.02)1.20 (1.11–1.30)
Positive gonorrhoea diagnosis‡
 No11
 Yes1.06 (0.99–1.14)1.31 (1.22–1.41)
Positive syphilis diagnosis§
 No11
 Yes1.06 (0.92–1.21)1.11 (0.98–1.26)
Positive HIV diagnosis§
 No11
 Yes0.96 (0.69–1.34)1.12 (0.79–1.60)
Positive chlamydia diagnosis at previous consult
 No1111
 Yes1.16 (1.08–1.25)1.11* (1.03–1.20)1.21 (1.13–1.30)1.08* (1.00–1.17)
Positive gonorrhoea diagnosis at previous consult
 No1111
 Yes1.20 (1.11–1.29)1.13* (1.04–1.23)1.27 (1.18–1.36)1.09* (1.01–1.18)
Positive syphilis diagnosis at previous consult
 No11
 Yes1.21 (1.08–1.35)1.22 (1.08–1.37)
Positive HIV diagnosis at previous consult§
 No11
 Yes0.97 (0.76–1.22)0.97 (0.69–1.35)
  • *p Value<0.05.

  • **p Value<0.001.

  • †Adjusted for age, region of STI clinic and socioeconomic status as well.

  • ‡Excluded from multivariable analysis during backward elimination.

  • §Not included in multivariable analysis due to low significance univariable analysis (p value > 0.1).

  • ¶Example of interpretation: consistent testers who received partner notification were 1.32 times more likely to return to the STI clinic at any point in time compared with consistent testers who did not receive partner notification.