Explore the vast range of titles available.

Purpose This study investigated the difference of effects between advanced partner notification (APN) and traditional partner notification (TPN). Methods The subjects who had Western bolt test or newly diagnosed with HIV were recruited. All subjects were randomly assigned into experimental and control group, 30 subjects in each group. Advanced Partner Notification was therefore developed based on the self-efficacy concept of Bandura. The process of APN includes advanced interaction model, comprehensive assessment model for partner information, and promoting self-efficacy of partner notification model. In control group, 30 subjects accepted the process of TPN. Results Sixty participants were men who have sex with men and unmarried. The mean age was 28.3 years (SD = 4.64). The results revealed that the index cases of APN were significantly better than the group of TPNM in provided more contactable partner of 107 cases (t = 2.16, p = 0.037), successed notified more partner of 73 cases (t = 2.25, p = 0.029), receiving HIV test more partner of 25 cases (t = 2.05, = 0.046). There were 22 partners whose HIV test were positive in APN group (HIV positive rate was 41.51%) and 7 partners whose HIV test were positive in TPN group (HIV positive rate was 25.0%). The HIV positive partners in APN group were 15 cases (t = 2.64, p = 0.01) more than those in TPN group. In addition, the mean difference in safer sexual knowledge, number of sexual partners, frequency of unsafe sexual behaviours, frequency of safer sexual behaviours, frequency of resource referral numbers, and process evaluation of PN were significantly better than those in TPN group. Conclusion The process of APN is better than the process of TPN in many aspects. The result can improve the quality of current partner notification policy and practise.

Partner notification (PN) is an important method for controlling the AIDS epidemic worldwide. Here, we looked into the differences between two PN counseling modes for HIV (+) men who have sex with men in Taiwan. Using random assignment, we placed 42 of the 84 subjects into the experimental group where they received two sessions of PN counseling, while the control group (42) received only one session. All 84 subjects were single males with an average age of 28.06. The mean number of successful notified partner was 5.38 (SD = 3.44) in the experimental which was statistically significantly higher than 2.81 (SD = 1.62) in the control group (β = 0.650, p  = 0.000). The notification success rate was 77.13 % in the experimental and 74.21 % in the control group (IRR 1.039, 95 % CI 0.83–1.30). In the experimental and control group, the average number of the partners accepted an HIV test was 1.86 (SD = 1.58) and 0.79 (SD = 0.66) (β = 0.601, p  = 0.000), and 39.74 and 27.27 % of the tested partners were HIV positive (IRR 1.457, 95 % CI 0.69–3.06). The study results may be used to improve the policies and practices for PN and contact follow-up.

Background Partner notification (PN) is an important public health activity in STI control to stop onwward transmission. Various forms of PN services have been developed but not all have been evaluated to the same extent. In the era of evidence-based resource allocation, it is of utmost importance to focus limited resources on services shown to be the most efficient and effective. Methods A review of the current literature and of the National Collaborating Centre for Infectious Diseases (NCCID) STBBI partner notification (PN) project productions was conducted. The impact of these various forms of PN services on disease incidence, re-infection, relationship status and healthcare costs will serve as efficiency and effectiveness markers. Results Outcomes of MSM PN services has been measured and found to be associated with reduced index case GC and CT reinfection rates through patient delivered therapy, higher adoption of safer sexual practises in both index case and their partners, reduced incidence of STIs, higher rates of notification to long term partners and significant partners, high acceptability of face-to-face patient delivered partner notification in significant or long term relationships compared to higher acceptability of physician or electronic notification for casual or anonymous partnerships lower cost per case reached by patient referral compared to provider referral, lower levels of stress in relationships. Emotional and physical abuse after PN services can occur. The fears accompanying PN services can affect sexual spontaneity. Caution should be used before discarding PN services when efficiency or effectiveness is low because epidemiologic insight can still be gathered to help redirect screening activities. Conclusions A Review of the evidence indicates that MSM PN services works!

Background Partner notification (PN) is an essential element of STI control. Typically partner notification has been supported by specialist health advisors based in GUM clinics, but recently the role has been extended to community based Chlamydia screening officers (including primary care). We aimed to explore and compare costs of various approaches to PN for Chlamydia in different settings. Methods We compared costs of being offered one of five approaches to partner notification from the health service perspective: Routine specialist clinic PN (patient referral including infection specific information, and advice that the sex partner should attend clinic for testing and treatment) Accelerated Partner Therapy (APT Hotline): nurse initiated PN at the general practise followed by telephone assessment of sex partner by clinic-based nurse qualified health adviser; Accelerated Partner Therapy (APT Pharmacy): nurse initiated PN at the general practise followed by assessment of sex partner by trained community pharmacist; Patient referral, where patients are advised by phone by qualified health adviser on the need for partner to be tested and treated. Provider referral, where patients accept the offer of a specialist health adviser contacting one or more partner(s) by phone. For all pathways primary costs were collected prospectively in a specific exploratory study. Results The least costly strategy is nurse led PN (strategy 2) costing approximately £53 per index case (2011 costs). The most costly strategy is provider referral (strategy 6) which cost £96 per index case. Conclusion Where health service providers assume responsibility for contacting partners there will be substantial additional cost. Before any such policy is implemented, a demonstrable improvement in PN outcomes should be established.

To meet UNAIDS’ 90–90–90 treatment goals, effective approaches to HIV testing services (HTSs) are urgently needed. In 2015, a cross-sectional study was conducted to evaluate effectiveness and feasibility of partner notification for HTS in Tanzania. Men and women newly diagnosed with HIV were enrolled as index clients, listed sexual partners, and given options to notify and link their partners to HTS. Of 653 newly diagnosed individuals, 390 index clients were enrolled, listed 438 sexual partners, of whom 249 (56.8%) were successfully referred. Of 249 partners reaching the facilities, 96% tested for HIV, 148 (61.9%) tested HIV+ (all newly diagnosed), and 104 (70.3%) of partners testing positive were enrolled into HIV care and treatment. Results showed good acceptability, feasibility and effectiveness, as evidenced by high uptake of partner notification among newly diagnosed individuals, over half of listed partners successfully referred, and a very high positivity rate among referred sexual partners.

HIV partner notification is a key intervention to facilitate access to HIV testing and treatment. This qualitative study investigated the strengths and weaknesses of the HIV partner notification program in Iran. Additionally, it provides comprehensive recommendations to mitigate potential harms and maximize the benefits of partner notification services. Using purposive sampling, 15 participants, including policymakers, service providers, and researchers in the field of HIV, were recruited from nine provinces between September and December 2023. The qualitative content analysis was conducted using the Graneheim and Lundman approach. Several strengths were reported for the HIV partner notification program, including alignment with international guidelines, use of trained counselors, integration with current HIV testing guidelines being used by HIV testing centers funded by the Ministry of Health, and a well-developed monitoring and evaluation plan at the facility, provincial, and national levels. Notable weaknesses of the program included a lack of a detailed implementation plan overall and for some key populations at high risk for HIV, such as female sex workers, lack of integration of the program with HIV testing services provided in hospitals and HIV centers funded by the Welfare Organization in Iran, lack of a simple quality checklist for monitoring and evaluation of the program. To increase the coverage and quality of the HIV partner notification program in Iran, a more detailed implementation plan, a simple quality checklist, and more targeted advocacy and training programs are needed.

Introduction Several countries in southern Africa have made significant progress towards reaching the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS goal of ensuring that 90% of people living with HIV are aware of their status. In Zimbabwe, progress towards this “first 90” was estimated at 73% in 2016. To reach the remaining people living with HIV who have undiagnosed infection, the Zimbabwe Ministry of Health and Child Care has been promoting index testing and partner notification services (PNS). We describe the implementation of index testing and PNS under the Zimbabwe HIV Care and Treatment (ZHCT) project and the resulting uptake, HIV positivity rate and links to HIV treatment. Methods The ZHCT project has been implemented since March 2016, covering a total of 12 districts in three provinces. To assess the project's performance on index testing, we extracted data on HIV testing from the district health information system (DHIS 2) from March 2016 to May 2018, validated it using service registers and calculated monthly HIV positivity rates using Microsoft Excel. Data were disaggregated by district, province, sex and service delivery point. We used SPSS to assess for statistical differences in paired monthly HIV positivity rates by sex, testing site, and province. Results The average HIV positivity rate rose from 10% during the first six months of implementation to more than 30% by August 2016 and was sustained above 30% through May 2018. The overall facility HIV positivity rate was 4.1% during the same period. The high HIV positivity rate was achieved for both males and females (mean monthly HIV positivity rate of 31.3% for males and 33.7% for females), with females showing significantly higher positivity compared to males (p < 0.001). The ZHCT mean monthly HIV positivity rate from index testing (32.6%) was significantly higher than that achieved through provider‐initiated testing and counselling and other facility HIV testing modalities (4.1%, p < 0.001). Conclusions The ZHCT project has demonstrated successes in implementing index testing and PNS by attaining a high HIV positivity rate sustained over the study period. As the country moves towards HIV epidemic control, index testing and PNS are critical strategies for targeted HIV case identification.

Assisted partner notification (APN) is recommended by the World Health Organization to notify sexual partners of HIV exposure. Since 2018, APN has been offered in Uganda to Ugandan nationals and refugees. Distinct challenges faced by individuals in refugee settlements may influence APN utilization and effectiveness. To explore APN barriers and facilitators, we extracted index client and sexual partner data from APN registers at 11 health centers providing care to refugees and Ugandan nationals in West Nile Uganda and conducted qualitative interviews with health workers (N = 32). Since APN started, 882 index clients participated in APN identifying 1126 sexual partners. Following notification, 95% (1025/1126) of partners tested for HIV; 22% (230/1025) were diagnosed with HIV with 14% (139/1025) of tested partners newly diagnosed. Fear of stigma and disclosure-related violence limit APN utilization and effectiveness. Prospective research involving index clients and sexual partners is needed to facilitate safe APN optimization in refugee settlements.

Background Sexually transmitted infection (STI) partner notification is key to fostering STI cure and preventing onward STI transmission; this is critical among people planning for pregnancy given the high STI morbidity and mortality among neonates. This qualitative study explores how women planning for pregnancy and considering HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis approach STI partner notification in Durban, South Africa to inform future interventions. Methods We conducted a cohort study evaluating pre-exposure prophylaxis use as a part of safer conception care among adult women (≥ 18 years) without HIV, partnered with a man living with HIV or unknown HIV-serostatus, and planning for pregnancy. As part of an STI-focused sub-study, 25 women who completed etiologic STI screening also completed qualitative interviews exploring participant STI partner notification practices, preferences, and interaction with pregnancy. We used an inductive and deductive approach to generate a codebook, organized our findings according to the Disclosure Processes Model, and identified preliminary themes using content analysis. Results The median age of sub-study participants was 25 (range 19–33) years, five (20%) were diagnosed with an STI during the study, and 2 (8%) became pregnant during the study. Preliminary themes included 1) Participants’ perceptions of their own and their partner’s additional partnerships affected STI partner notification perceptions and practices; 2) Participants’ asymptomatic presentation and etiologic, laboratory diagnosis supported partner notification; 3) Participants reported male reluctance to engage with healthcare services and a reliance on female participant testing and subsequent partner notification; 4) Participants endorsed provider-assisted STI partner notification; 5) STI diagnoses and partner notification led participants to mistrust their partners and subsequently impacted their condom use during pregnancy planning. Conclusions We found a lack of partner concurrency and asymptomatic infection to influence STI partner notification with partner notification affecting pregnancy planning and condom use. Since women report having high STI testing and care engagement, they bear a high burden of partner notification and potential subsequent blame and often appreciated provider assistance. Interventions are needed to engage men in STI testing and care and to mitigate the potential harms of STI partner notification.

ObjectivesWe investigated the effects of an enhanced partner notification (PN) counselling intervention with the offer of provider-assisted referral among people diagnosed with STI in a Cape Town public clinic.MethodsParticipants were adults diagnosed with STI at a community clinic. After the standard STI consultation, participants were randomly allocated in a 1:1:1 ratio to (1) ‘HE’: 20 min health education; (2) ‘RR’: 45 min risk reduction skills counselling; or (3) ‘ePN’: 45 min enhanced partner notification communication skills counselling and the offer of provider-assisted referral. The primary outcome was the incidence of repeat STI diagnoses during the 12 months after recruitment, and the secondary outcome was participants’ reports 2 weeks after diagnosis of notifying recent partners. Incidence rate ratios (IRRs) were used to compare the incidence rates between arms using a Poisson regression model.ResultsThe sample included 1050 participants, 350 per group, diagnosed with STI between June 2014 and August 2017. We reviewed 1048 (99%) participant records, and identified 136 repeat STI diagnoses in the ePN arm, 138 in the RR arm and 141 in the HE arm. There was no difference in the annual incidence of STI diagnosis between the ePN and HE arms (IRR: 1.0; 95% CI 0.7 to 1.3), or between the RR and HE arms (IRR: 0.9; 95% CI 0.7 to 1.2). There was a greater chance of a partner being notified in the ePN condition compared with the HE condition, 64.3% compared with 53.8%, but no difference between the RR and HE arms.ConclusionsPN counselling and education with provider-assisted services has the potential to change the behaviour of people diagnosed with STIs, increasing the number of partners they notify by more than 10%. However, these changes in behaviour did not lead to a reduction of repeat STI diagnoses.Trial registration numberPACTR201606001682364.