Current practices of partner notification among MSM with HIV, gonorrhoea and syphilis in the Netherlands: an urgent need for improvement

BMC Infectious Diseases

Eline Op de Coul¹  Hannelore Götz³  Ralph Spijker²  Yolanda van Weert¹  Imke Schreuder⁴  Fleur van Aar¹ 

[1] Epidemiology & Surveillance department, Centre for Infectious Disease Control, National Institute of Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven, the Netherlands;STI AIDS Netherlands, Amsterdam, the Netherlands;Department of Infectious Disease Control – division STI/HIV, GGD Rotterdam-Rijnmond, Municipal Public Health Service Rotterdam-Rijnmond, Rotterdam, the Netherlands;Department of Virology, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, the Netherlands

关键词: The Netherlands;    Gonorrhoea;    Syphilis;    HIV;    MSM;    Partner notification;   

Others  :  1175377
DOI  :  10.1186/1471-2334-12-114

 received in 2011-10-11, accepted in 2012-05-14,  发布年份 2012

【 摘 要 】

Background

Partner notification (PN) among individuals newly diagnosed with HIV/STI is seen as a vital tool to identify others at risk of infection. However, hardly any data are available on the effectiveness of PN on HIV/STI transmission in the Netherlands. This study aims to fill this gap by assessing current PN practices, case-finding effectiveness, and determinants of being notified among men having sex with men (MSM) in the Netherlands.

Methods

Nurses from five STI centers participated in a prospective pilot study on PN outcomes (partners being: at risk, notifiable, notified, and tested) for HIV/STI, by completing a newly developed PN registration form (PN database). PN outcomes including case-finding effectiveness (number of newly diagnosed cases in partners/number of partners being tested) for HIV, syphilis, and gonorrhoea were studied among MSM. Furthermore, the national STI database was analyzed to identify determinants of being notified. The number of infections that remained undetected was estimated based on these two databases.

Results

In total 105 MSM, newly diagnosed with HIV/STI, reported 612 sexual partners at risk of whom 41% were notifiable and 31% were notified. Patient referral was the predominant PN method (90%). The overall case-finding percentage was 36% (HIV: 15-33%, gonorrhoea: 17-50% and syphilis: 4-11%). Case-finding percentages were lower in the national STI database: 21% (5%, 28%, 12%). Persons with one or more sexual partners, known HIV positives, and IDU were more likely to be notified to the STI clinic. Notified clients were more likely to have HIV/STI than unnotified clients (OR 1.7-2.5). Based on these two databases, an estimated 75 to 133 infections remained undetected (HIV: 12–90; gonorrhoea: 28–97; syphilis: 5–12 infections).

Conclusions

Partner notification among MSM in the Netherlands is suboptimal; an extensive number of STI/HIV infections remained undetected mainly due to unnotifiable partners. To enhance PN practices, combined and innovative PN interventions such as Internet-based PN will be implemented for hard-to-reach MSM and other risk groups.

【 授权许可】

   
2012 van Aar et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Stolte IG, Dukers NH, Geskus RB, et al.: Homosexual men change to risky sex when perceiving less threat of HIV/AIDS since availability of highly active antiretroviral therapy: a longitudinal study. AIDS 2004, 18(2):303-309.
• [2]Gras L, van Sighem A, Smit C, et al.: on behalf of the Netherlands Collaborative HIV treatment centers: Monitoring of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection in the Netherlands, report 2010. Amsterdam: HIV Monitoring Foundation; 2011.
• [3]Vriend HJ, Koedijk FDH, van der Sande MAB, et al.: Sexually transmitted infections, including HIV, in the Netherlands in 2009. Bilthoven; RIVM report 210261007; 2010.
• [4]van Veen MG, Presanis AM, Conti S, et al.: National estimate of HIV prevalence in the Netherlands: comparison and applicability of different estimation tools. AIDS 2011, 25(2):229-237.
• [5]Brenner BG, Roger M, Routy JP, et al.: High rates of forward transmission events after acute/early HIV-1 infection. JID 2007, 195:951-959.
• [6]Brenner BG, Roger M, Moisi DD, et al.: Transmission networks of drug resistance acquired in primary/early stage HIV infection. AIDS 2008, 22:2509-2515.
• [7]Mayaud P, McCormick D: Interventions against sexually transmitted infections (STI) to prevent HIV infection. Brit Med Bul 2001, 58:129-153.
• [8]Adler M, Foster S, Grosskurth H, et al.: Sexual Health & Care: Sexually Transmitted Infections. Guidelines for Prevention and Treatment. In DFID, Health & Population Occasional Paper. 2nd edition. London: Department for International Development; 1998.
• [9]Hogben M, McNally T, McPheeters M, et al.: The effectiveness of HIV partner counseling and referral services in increasing identification of HIV positive individuals a systematic review. Am J Prev Med 2007, 33(2suppl):S89-S100.
• [10]Landis SE, Schoenbach VJ, Weber DJ, et al.: Results of a randomized trial of partner notification in cases of HIV infection in North Carolina. New Engl J Med 1992, 326:101-106.
• [11]Burnet Institute: medical research, practical action: Partner notification of sexually transmitted infections in New South Wales: an informed literature review. Centre for Population Health; 2010.
• [12]Brewer D: Case-finding effectiveness of partner notification and cluster investigation for sexually transmitted diseases/HIV. Sex Transm Dis 2005, 32(2):78-83.
• [13]Macke BA, Maher JE: Partner notification in the United States: an evidence-based review. Am J Prev Med 1999, 17(3):230-242.
• [14]Van de Laar MJW, Termorshuizen F, van den Hoek A: Patient referral by patients with gonorrhoea and chlamydial infection: case-finding observations. Sex Transm Dis 1997, 24(6):334-342.
• [15]Centers for Disease. Control and Prevention: Recommendations for partner services programs for HIV infection, syphilis, gonorrhoea, and chlamydial infection. MMWR Recommendations and Reports 2008, 57(RR-9):1-83.
• [16]Hogben M, Kissinger P: A review of partner notification for sex partners of men infected with Chlamydia. Sex Transm Dis 2008, 35(11 Suppl):S34-S39.
• [17]Gray RT, Hoare A, Prestage GP, et al.: Frequent testing of highly sexually active gay men is required to control syphilis. Sex Transm Dis 2010, 37(5):298-305.
• [18]Landelijke Coördinatie Infectieziektebestrijding: Seksuele Gezondheidszorg Deel 1 Handboek Soa. Chapter 5. Draaiboek Partnerwaarschuwing bij soa. LCI/CIb/RIVM draaiboek infectieziekten.: RIVM; 2009 [in Dutch]. http://www.soaaids-professionals.nl/documenten/handboek_soa_09.pdf webcite.
• [19]Oxman AD, Scott EAF, Sellors JW, et al.: Partner notification for sexually transmitted diseases; an overview of the evidence. Can J Public Health 1994, 85(suppl 1):S41-S47.
• [20]Mathews C, Coetzee N: Partner Notification (Updated). BMJ Clinical Evidence 2009, 5:1605.
• [21]Mathews C, Coetzee N, Zwarenstein M, et al.: Strategies for partner notification for sexually transmitted diseases. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2001, 4:CD002843.
• [22]Trelle S, Shang A, Nartey L, et al.: Improved effectiveness of partner notification for patients with sexually transmitted infections: systematic review. BMJ 2007, 334(7589):354.
• [23]van den Broek IVF, Verheij RA, van Dijk CE, Koedijk FDH, van der Sande MAB, van Bergen JEAM: Trends in sexually transmitted infections in the Netherlands, combining surveillance data from general practices and sexually transmitted infection centers. BMC Family Practice 2010, 11:39. BioMed Central Full Text
• [24]van Veen MG, Heijman RLJ, Götz HM, de Wolf F, Zaheri S, Fennema JSA, van der Sande MAB: Delay of entry into care in hiv positive individuals (oral presentation, NCHIV conference. nov 2011 Amsterdam). http://www.hiv-monitoring.nl/nederlands/onderzoek/presentaties/2011/ webcite.
• [25]Schreuder I, Op de Coul E: Partnerwaarschuwing bij hiv: nog onvoldoende zicht op de effectiviteit van partnerwaarschuwing. Infectieziekten Bulletin 2008, 19(8):253-254. [in Dutch]
• [26]Mimiaga MJ, Tetu AM, Gortmaker S, et al.: HIV and STD status among MSM and attitudes about Internet partner notification for STD exposure. Sex Transm Dis 2008, 35(2):111-116.
• [27]Passin WF, Kim AS, Hutchinson AB, et al.: A systematic review of HIV partner counseling and referral services: client and provider attitudes, preferences, practices, and experiences. Sex Transm Dis 2006, 33:2.
• [28]Apoola A, Radcliffe KW, Das S, et al.: Preferences for partner notification method: variation in responses between respondents as index patients and contacts. Int J of STD and AIDS 2007, 18(7):493-494.
• [29]Bezemer D, van Sighem A, Lukashov VV, et al.: Transmission networks of HIV-1 among men having sex with men in the Netherlands. AIDS 2010, 24(2):271-282. 16