Table 1

 Feasibility and acceptability based on venue and tester uptake in phases 1 and 2 of community syphilis screening

Phase 1 (4 weeks)Phase 2 (3 weeks)
*p values for categorical variables from the χ2 test, p values for continuous variables from the Mann-Whitney test.
Feasibility
% of venues agreeing to participate77% (23/30)100% (16/16)
Number of venue sessions7057
Acceptability
Total number of men testing588502
Overall % of venue populations who tested9.8%11.4%
% of non-public sex site bar/club populations testing9.0%9.3%
% of sauna populations testing23.1%34.8%
% of cruising ground populations testing11.7%11.4%
% of sex on premises club populations testing12.0%19.5%
Effectiveness in testing at-risk populations
GUM non-attendance in last year65% (n = 380)58% (n = 292)
No of sexual contacts in past 90 days among all testers:
    0–131% (n = 181)29% (n = 144)
    2–1955% (n = 325)56% (n = 283)
    20+14% (n = 82)15% (n = 75)
No of sexual contacts in last 90 days among non-attendees:
    0–137% (n = 139)34% (n = 99)
    2–1953% (n = 202)53% (n = 154)
    20+10% (n = 39)13% (n = 39)
Difference between community testers and known syphilis cases: Phase 1 testers (n = 588) Known cases (n = 93) p Value* Phase 2 testers (n = 502) Known cases (n = 156) p Value*
Age (median)33330.54536340.170
Number of sexual contacts in last 90 days (median)430.733330.675
Effectiveness in identifying new index cases of syphilis
No of EIA positive results2943
No of previously undiagnosed syphilis cases89
No of previously undiagnosed syphilis cases that were early syphilis42
Co-infection1×HIV+ (already diagnosed)1×HIV+ (already diagnosed)
1×rectal gonorrhoea (co-diagnosed)1×rectal gonorrhoea (co-diagnosed)
1×chlamydia (co-diagnosed)