Article Text
PDF
Abstract
Objectives Partner notification (PN) following sexually transmitted disease (STI) diagnosis is a key strategy for controlling HIV/STI transmission. Anonymous partnerships are an important barrier to PN and often associated with high-risk sexual behaviour. Limited research has examined the profile of men who have sex with men (MSM) and transgender women (TW) who engage in anonymous sex. To better understand anonymous partnership practices in Lima, Peru, we assessed participant-level and partnership-level characteristics associated with anonymous sex among a sample of MSM and TW recently diagnosed with HIV/STI.
Methods MSM and TW diagnosed with HIV/STI within the past month completed a cross-sectional survey regarding anticipated PN practices. Participants reported sexual partnership types and characteristics of up to three of their most recent partners. Using a Poisson generalised estimating equation model, we assessed participant-level and partnership-level characteristics associated with anonymous partnerships.
Results Among 395 MSM and TW with HIV/STI, 36.0% reported at least one anonymous sexual partner in the past 3 months (mean of 8.6 anonymous partners per participant; SD 17.0). Of the 971 partnerships reported, 118 (12.2%) were anonymous and the majority (84.8%) were with male partners, followed by 11.0% with female partners and 4.2% with transgender/travesti partners. Partner-level characteristics associated with increased likelihood of having an anonymous partner included female (adjusted prevalence ratio (aPR) 2.28, 95% CI 1.05 to 4.95, p=0.04) or transgender/travesti (aPR 4.03, 95% CI 1.51 to 10.78, p=0.006) partner gender.
Conclusions By assessing both individual-level and dyadic-level factors, these results represent an important step in understanding the complexity of partnership interactions and developing alternative PN strategies for Latin America.
- PARTNER NOTIFICATION
- LATIN AMERICA
- INFECTIOUS DISEASES
- MEN
- HIV
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Introduction
Notification of sexual partners following HIV and/or sexually transmitted disease (STI) diagnosis is a key component of public health efforts for STI control.1 However, non-contactable partnerships pose a critical challenge to existing partner notification (PN) strategies, given the inherent inability to trace such partners following a sexual encounter. Anonymous sexual partners can be considered a subset of non-contactable partnerships, described in the available epidemiological literature as a key barrier to existing PN efforts for STI control among gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men (MSM) and transgender women (TW).2 The few studies that have addressed PN practices among MSM in Latin America have typically addressed anonymous as an undifferentiated part of the larger population of casual or secondary partners, and found that notification more frequently occurs within stable rather than casual partnerships.3 ,4 However, the unique characteristics of anonymous partnerships, including their inherent non-notifiability, point to the importance of additional research to better understand who constitutes this specific PN risk group and what factors structure their partnership interactions. Further information on anonymous partnerships among MSM in Latin America is needed to inform improved PN and prevention efforts.
Given the disproportionate burden of HIV and STI among MSM and TW in Latin America,5 ,6 as well as the rapid growth of technologies to support anonymous or pseudonymous sexual contacts among MSM,2 ,7 there is an urgent need to disentangle the defining factors and behavioural risks associated with anonymous partnerships from the larger group of casual, but traceable, partners. To better understand anonymous sexual partnerships in Lima, Peru, we assessed participant-level and partnership-level characteristics associated with anonymous sexual partnerships in a sample of MSM and TW recently diagnosed with HIV and/or another STI.
Methods
Study sample and procedures
Data for this analysis were drawn from a 2012 cross-sectional study of MSM and TW recently diagnosed with HIV and/or another STI in Lima, Peru. Eligibility was limited to MSM or TW who reported anal or oral intercourse with a male or TW partner during the previous year, and had been newly diagnosed with HIV, syphilis, genital herpes and/or gonorrhoea/chlamydia (NG/CT) within the previous 30 days. Detailed methods have previously been reported.4 Written informed consent was obtained from all study participants prior to enrolment, and the behavioural survey was self-administered at the clinic site. The study protocol was approved by the institutional review boards of the University of California, Los Angeles (G10-03-036-01) and Asociación Civil Impacta Salud y Educación (0104-2010-CE).
Measures
Anonymous partnership frequency and characteristics: aggregate data on participants’ sexual partnerships during the previous 3 months, including partnership type, were collected. ‘Anonymous’ partners were defined as ‘someone with whom you had sexual intercourse but do not know their full name or how to locate them’. Participants were asked to separately describe the characteristics of their three most recent partners, including partner gender and partnership type (stable, casual, anonymous, transactional sex client or transactional sex worker).
Participant characteristics: sociodemographic factors assessed included participants’ age, education, sexual orientation/gender identity (heterosexual, bisexual, homosexual and transgender (travesti), sexual role during intercourse (activo (insertive), pasivo (receptive) or moderno (versatile)). Condomless anal intercourse (CAI) on the participant level was defined by self-report of CAI with any sexual partner in the previous 3 months.
Partner characteristics: for each of their three most recent partnerships, participants were asked the number of times they had sex with the partner, the likelihood of having sex with the partner in future, the perceived likelihood of having transmitted their recently diagnosed HIV/STI to the partner, the perceived likelihood that the partner was the source of their recent HIV/STI diagnosis, the likelihood of notifying the partner of their diagnosis and their perceptions of the partner's gender and sexual orientation. CAI on the partnership level was defined according to participant self-report of condomless sex during each of their three most recent sexual partnerships individually.
Statistical analysis
Fisher's exact tests for dichotomous and t-tests for continuous variables were used to compare characteristics between participants who described one or more of their last three partners as an anonymous partner. Robust Poisson generalised estimating equations (GEE) were used to estimate prevalence ratios assessing participant-level and partner-level characteristics associated with an anonymous partnership, accounting for clustering by participant since participants could report up to three partnerships.8 The GEE model consisted of a Poisson distribution and a log link, with a sandwich estimator of the variance. All analyses were conducted in Stata V.12.0 (StataCorp, College Station, Texas, USA).
Results
Among 395 participants, 142 (36%) reported sex with at least one anonymous partner in the past 3 months. Eighty-four (21.3%) participants reported an anonymous partner as one or more of their three most recent partnerships. Within the entire study population, 192 (50.5%) participants reported they were diagnosed with an STI (non-HIV) only within the previous 30 days, 72 (19.0%) were newly diagnosed with HIV infection only and 116 (30.5%) with HIV/STI co-infection. Among participants who reported a recent anonymous partner, 47 (58.8%) were diagnosed with STI only, 12 (15.0%) with HIV only and 21 (26.3%) with HIV/STI co-infection.
Table 1 lists results of bivariate and multivariable models assessing participant and partner characteristics associated with recent anonymous partnerships among the 971 partners reported. Of the 971 partnerships reported, 118 (12.2%) were anonymous. Participant-level characteristics significantly associated with increased likelihood of reporting an anonymous partner included moderno sexual role (adjusted prevalence ratio (aPR) 5.40, 95% CI 2.78 to 10.46, p<0.001). Partnership-level characteristics associated with increased likelihood of having an anonymous partner included female (aPR 2.28, 95% CI 1.05 to 4.94, p=0.04) or transgender/travesti (aPR 4.03, 95% CI 1.51 to 10.78, p=0.006) partner gender.
PRs assessing factors associated with anonymous partnerships (N=971 partnerships)
Conclusion
This is the first study, to our knowledge, to report individual-level and partnership-level factors associated with anonymous sex among MSM and TW recently diagnosed with HIV and/or an STI in Lima, Peru. These individuals who represent a likely index population for future PN efforts are a critical study population for developing notification interventions. Anonymous sex is a frequent practice among our sample, highlighting an immediate challenge to existing PN strategies that depend on the ability to trace partners following a sexual encounter. By characterising the epidemiological profile of MSM and TW recently diagnosed with HIV and/or an STI who have engaged in anonymous sex, both at the individual level and dyadic level, our results represent an important step towards developing alternative notification strategies.
The strengths of this study centre on our multilevel results showing that close to one-third of MSM and TW recently diagnosed with HIV and/or an STI reported at least one recent anonymous partner, and over 20% of their three most recent sexual partnerships were with someone they could not contact or notify. Nonetheless, several limitations should be considered when interpreting these results. Though the study survey provided descriptions of each of the main partnership categories, participants may have independently constructed their own definitions of these categories. Also, partner characteristics including gender identity and sexual orientation were reported by participants, and may not reflect the true identities of their anonymous sex partners. Furthermore, anonymous partners are only one subset of non-traceable partners and further research needs to attend to the frequent use of technological platforms with partial or pseudonymous contact information in order to distinguish between anonymous and potentially traceable sexual contacts.
Contributing to knowledge of the partnership contexts for HIV and STI transmission among MSM and TW in Peru, these results further underscore the need to expand analysis of sexual practices beyond a simple ‘stable versus casual’ partnership dichotomy. Paralleling existing literature, our findings report that participant characteristics associated with anonymous sexual contacts include moderno (versatile) sexual role.3 ,9 Furthermore, at the dyadic level, reporting a female or a transgender woman partner as one of the three most recent sexual partnerships was also associated with likelihood of engaging in anonymous sex. These data did not assess reasons for engagement in anonymous partnerships; however, stigma has been reported among Peruvian MSM as a reason for hiding casual sexual encounters with men and TW from their primary female partners in the context of PN.3 Sexual stigma may be a possible mechanism for anonymous sexual contacts and warrants further exploration.
These data suggest several potential approaches to addressing anonymous partnerships as a critical component of PN efforts. First, the use of mixed methodologies is needed to better inform evolving PN approaches to HIV and STI control and address the wide diversity of unique challenges of different sexual partner types among MSM and TW in Latin America. To improve intervention development, scholars should assess the social and cultural meanings of anonymous versus untraceable partners, especially with regard to online platforms that use pseudonymous partner identities but may facilitate contact tracing.10 Beyond characterising prevalence and factors associated with anonymous sex, alternative public health strategies are needed to address untraceable partners (eg, education and testing outreach directed to venues or websites where index cases report meeting large numbers of anonymous partners) and provide supportive approaches to PN among Peruvian sexual and gender minorities recently diagnosed with HIV and/or STIs.
Supplementary materials
Abstract in Spanish
This web only file has been produced by the BMJ Publishing Group from an electronic file supplied by the author(s) and has not been edited for content.
- Abstract in Spanish - Online abstract
Footnotes
Handling editor Jackie A Cassell
Contributors APB and JLC designed data collection tools. ERS, JS, JRL and JLC monitored data collection. APB and CEO wrote the statistical analysis plan, cleaned and analysed the data and drafted and revised the paper. All authors revised the draft paper.
Funding APB is supported by Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health & Human Development T32 HD049339 (PI: C. Nathanson) and the National Institutes of Mental Health R25 MH083620 (PI: T. Flanigan). CEO is supported by a National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease T32AI007535 (PI: G. Seage) and National Institute on Drug Abuse T32 DA0131911 (PI: T. Flanigan). Funding for this project provided by NIMH K23 MH084611 (PI: J. Clark).
Competing interests None declared.
Ethics approval Ethical approval for this study was obtained from the Institutional Review Board at the University of California, Los Angeles (G10-03-036-01) and the Comite de Bioética at Asociación Civil Impacta Salud y Educación (0104-2010-CE).
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.