Witzel T Charles, Weatherburn Peter, Rodger Alison J, Bourne Adam H, Burns Fiona M
Sigma Research, Department of Social and Environmental Health Research, Faculty of Public Health & Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Research Department of Infection & Population Health, UCL and Royal Free London NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
BMC Public Health. 2017 May 22;17(1):491. doi: 10.1186/s12889-017-4370-0.
HIV testing has seen a rapid evolution over the last decade with multiple modalities now in use globally. In recent years HIV self-testing (HIVST) has been legalised in the UK paving the way for further expansion of testing. Interventions are delivered in particular social contexts which shape uptake. It is therefore important to understand how novel interventions are likely to be received by their intended users. This study aims to understand how HIVST compliments existing testing strategies considered or adopted by men who have sex with men (MSM). We do this by analysing normative discourses surrounding HIV testing and their perceptions of HIVST's potential future roles.
Six focus group discussions (FGDs) were conducted with 47 MSM in London, Manchester and Plymouth. One focus group included only MSM who reported higher risk behaviours and one with those who had never tested for HIV. Data were analysed through a thematic framework analysis.
Three main narratives for testing for HIV were identified: (i) testing in response to a specific risk event; (ii) as reassurance when there was a small amount of doubt or anxiety related to HIV; and (iii) in response to social norms perpetuated through peers, HIV community groups and the medical establishment to test regularly for HIV. HIVST had limited utility for men when testing in response to specific risk events except in the case of significant structural barriers to other testing opportunities. HIVST was considered to have utility when seeking reassurance, and was thought to be very useful when testing to satisfy the needs and expectations of others around regular testing. There was some ambivalence about the incursion of a clinical intervention into the home.
HIVST following risk events will likely be limited to those for whom existing service provision is insufficient to meet immediate needs based on structural or personal barriers to testing. Obligations of biological citizenship are central to MSM's understanding of the utility of HIVST. In the context of discourses of biocitizenship, men perceive HIVST to have dual roles: firstly as a tool to manage (mild) anxiety around one's HIV status based on an acknowledgment of HIV vulnerability arising from being homosexually active. Secondly, HIVST is useful in complying with social norms and meeting the perceived demands of biomedicine.
在过去十年中,HIV检测方法迅速演变,目前全球有多种检测方式在使用。近年来,HIV自我检测(HIVST)在英国已合法化,为检测的进一步推广铺平了道路。干预措施是在特定的社会背景下实施的,这些背景会影响检测的接受程度。因此,了解新的干预措施可能如何被目标用户接受非常重要。本研究旨在了解HIVST如何补充男男性行为者(MSM)所考虑或采用的现有检测策略。我们通过分析围绕HIV检测的规范性话语以及他们对HIVST未来潜在作用的看法来做到这一点。
在伦敦、曼彻斯特和普利茅斯与47名MSM进行了六次焦点小组讨论(FGD)。一个焦点小组仅包括报告有高风险行为的MSM,另一个焦点小组则是从未进行过HIV检测的MSM。通过主题框架分析对数据进行了分析。
确定了三种主要的HIV检测叙述:(i)针对特定风险事件进行检测;(ii)当对HIV存在少量疑虑或焦虑时作为一种安心的方式;(iii)响应同伴、HIV社区团体和医疗机构长期形成的社会规范而定期进行HIV检测。除了在获取其他检测机会存在重大结构性障碍的情况下,HIVST对于因特定风险事件进行检测的男性效用有限。当寻求安心时,HIVST被认为是有用的,并且当检测是为了满足周围其他人对定期检测的需求和期望时,它被认为非常有用。对于临床干预进入家庭存在一些矛盾情绪。
基于检测的结构性或个人障碍,现有服务提供不足以满足即时需求的人群,风险事件后的HIVST可能仅限于这些人群。生物公民义务是MSM理解HIVST效用的核心。在生物公民话语的背景下,男性认为HIVST具有双重作用:首先,作为一种工具,基于承认因同性恋行为而产生的HIV易感性来管理围绕个人HIV状况的(轻度)焦虑。其次,HIVST有助于遵守社会规范并满足生物医学的预期要求。