Article Text

Download PDFPDF

P109 The Santé project: Attitude towards STI risk assessment, preferences for STI behavioural risk reduction interventions: Service Users Perspectives
  1. Anupama Roy1,
  2. Carina King2,
  3. Alec Miners3,
  4. Carrie Llewellyn1,
  5. Alex Pollard1,
  6. Richard Gilson2,
  7. Daniel Richardson1,4,
  8. Laura Clark4,
  9. Fiona Burns2,
  10. Alison Rodgers2,
  11. Julia Bailey2,
  12. Maryam Shahmanesh2
  1. 1Division of Primary Care and Public Health, Brighton and Sussex Medical School, Brighton, East Sussex, UK
  2. 2Research Department of Infection and Population Health, University College London, London, UK
  3. 3Department of Health Services, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK
  4. 4Brighton and Sussex University Hospital NHS Trust, brighton, East Sussex, UK


Background/introduction A variety of risk-reduction interventions may be suitable for sexual health clinic attendees.

Aim(s)/objectives In the SANTE project, we explored service users’ (SU) perceptions of their STI risk, and experiences and preferences for risk reduction interventions.

Methods Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 15 young people (YP) (16–25 years) and 20 MSM (≥16 years) from two SH clinics. Data were analysed thematically. Based on these, a Discrete Choice Experiment (DCE) to quantitatively assess YP and MSM preferences for interventions was designed and conducted in three clinics (n = 371).

Results Most participants, despite presenting with symptoms or concerned about STIs, did not perceive themselves to be at risk. Most reported receiving SH promotion but felt access to accurate information was lacking. While short advert-like videos were acceptable, onscreen material in waiting rooms was deemed inappropriate by some SUs. Opinions on group sessions were mixed. 1:1 sessions were favoured, with talking therapies acceptable if needed. Privacy around mobile apps was a concern while online materials from a reputable source were acceptable. DCE results demonstrated preferences for ‘talking interventions’, while all interventions were generally preferred to ‘nothing’. People strongly disliked peer-led interventions compared to others, and preferred 1:1 to group sessions. Latent class analysis identified three respondent groups, those that preferred talking (56%), email/text (29%) or nothing (15%).

Discussion/conclusion Young people and MSM welcome SH promotion offered through SH clinics. Triangulation demonstrated strong preferences for 1:1 talking interventions. Awareness of sexual risk was not commensurate with actual risk, suggesting that providers need to direct service users to appropriate interventions.

Statistics from

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.