You are here

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
Research letter
Chemsex, sexual behaviour and STI-PrEP use among HIV-PrEP users during the COVID-19 pandemic in Brighton, UK
  1. Miriam Ringshall1,
  2. Richard Cooper1,
  3. Waseem Rawdah1,
  4. Sean Perera1,
  5. Alan Bannister1,
  6. Kayleigh Nichols1,
  7. Colin Fitzpatrick1,
  8. Daniel Richardson1,2
  1. 1 University Hospitals Sussex NHS Foundation Trust, Brighton, UK
  2. 2 Brighton and Sussex Medical School, Brighton, UK
  1. Correspondence to Dr Daniel Richardson, Sexual Health & HIV, University Hospitals Sussex NHS Foundation Trust, Brighton BN2 5BE, UK; docdanielr{at}hotmail.com

https://doi.org/10.1136/sextrans-2021-055216

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.

    The COVID-19 pandemic and social distancing restrictions have been associated with changes in use of HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (HIV-PrEP), use of doxycycline as STI-PrEP and sexual behaviour including chemsex behaviour among men who have sex with men (MSM).1 2 As part of a local service needs assessment for the provision of services for MSM using PrEP and MSM engaging in chemsex, we asked MSM to complete a short anonymous online electronic survey after their PrEP monitoring appointment.

    Of the 269 MSM who attended for HIV-PrEP monitoring …

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Handling editor Anna Maria Geretti

    • Contributors DR, MR and RC designed the study. DR and MR analysed the data. DR, MR, RC, WR, SP, AB, KN and CF contributed to data collection and to the final manuscript.

    • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

    • Competing interests None declared.

    • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; internally peer reviewed.