Institute for Global Health, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
School of Life Course and Population Sciences, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
PLoS One. 2022 Oct 19;17(10):e0276209. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0276209. eCollection 2022.
INTRODUCTION: HIV transmission continues among gay and bisexual men who have sex with men (GBMSM), with those who are younger, or recent migrants, or of minority ethnicity or who are gender diverse remaining at increased risk. We aimed to identify and describe recent studies evaluating the effectiveness of HIV prevention interventions for GBMSM in high income countries. METHODS: We searched ten electronic databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), conducted in high income settings, and published since 2013 to update a previous systematic review (Stromdahl et al, 2015). We predefined four outcome measures of interest: 1) HIV incidence 2) STI incidence 3) condomless anal intercourse (CLAI) (or measure of CLAI) and 4) number of sexual partners. We used the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (UK) Quality Appraisal of Intervention Studies tool to assess the quality of papers included in the review. As the trials contained a range of effect measures (e.g. odds ratio, risk difference) comparing the arms in the RCTs, we converted them into standardized effect sizes (SES) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: We identified 39 original papers reporting 37 studies. Five intervention types were identified: one-to-one counselling (15 papers), group interventions (7 papers), online interventions (9 papers), Contingency Management for substance use (2 papers) and Pre-exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) (6 papers). The quality of the studies was mixed with over a third of studies rated as high quality and 11% rated as poor quality. There was some evidence that one-to-one counselling, group interventions (4-10 participants per group) and online (individual) interventions could be effective for reducing HIV transmission risk behaviours such as condomless anal intercourse. PrEP was the only intervention that was consistently effective at reducing HIV incidence. CONCLUSIONS: Our systematic review of the recent evidence that we were able to analyse indicates that PrEP is the most effective intervention for reducing HIV acquisition among GBMSM. Targeted and culturally tailored behavioural interventions for sub-populations of GBMSM vulnerable to HIV infection and other STIs should also be considered, particularly for GBMSM who cannot access or decline to use PrEP.
简介:男男性行为者(GBMSM)中的艾滋病毒传播仍在继续,其中年龄较小、最近移民、少数族裔或性别多样化的人仍面临更高的风险。我们旨在确定并描述最近评估高收入国家针对 GBMSM 的艾滋病毒预防干预措施有效性的研究。
方法:我们在高收入环境中搜索了十个电子数据库,以更新之前的系统评价(Stromdahl 等人,2015 年),搜索了自 2013 年以来发表的随机对照试验(RCT)。我们预先设定了四个感兴趣的结果衡量标准:1)艾滋病毒发病率 2)性传播感染(STI)发病率 3)无保护肛交(CLAI)(或 CLAI 衡量标准)和 4)性伴侣数量。我们使用英国国家卫生与保健卓越研究所(NICE)干预研究质量评估工具来评估综述中包含的论文的质量。由于试验包含了一系列效果衡量标准(例如,比值比,风险差异)来比较 RCT 中的臂,我们将它们转换为具有 95%置信区间(CI)的标准化效应大小(SES)。
结果:我们确定了 39 篇原始论文,其中有 37 项研究。确定了五种干预类型:一对一咨询(15 篇论文)、小组干预(7 篇论文)、在线干预(9 篇论文)、物质使用的应急管理(2 篇论文)和暴露前预防(PrEP)(6 篇论文)。研究的质量参差不齐,超过三分之一的研究被评为高质量,11%的研究被评为低质量。有一些证据表明,一对一咨询、小组干预(每组 4-10 名参与者)和在线(个人)干预可以有效减少无保护肛交等艾滋病毒传播风险行为。PrEP 是唯一能够有效降低艾滋病毒发病率的干预措施。
结论:我们对最近的证据进行了系统评价,分析表明,PrEP 是降低 GBMSM 中 HIV 感染率的最有效干预措施。还应考虑针对易感染艾滋病毒和其他性传播感染的 GBMSM 亚人群的有针对性和文化上适当的行为干预措施,特别是对于无法获得或拒绝使用 PrEP 的 GBMSM。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2008-7-16
Medicine (Abingdon). 2022-4
J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2019-12