Gay Community Periodic Survey Melbourne 2014

Transcription

1 Gay Community Periodic Survey Melbourne 0 Never Stand Still Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences Centre for Social Research in Health Evelyn Lee Limin Mao Henry von Doussa Colin Batrouney Michael West Garrett Prestage Iryna Zablotska John de Wit Martin Holt Centre for Social Research in Health Victorian AIDS Council/Gay Men s Health Centre Department of Health, Victoria The Kirby Institute

2

3 Gay Community Periodic Survey MELBOURNE 0 Evelyn Lee Limin Mao Henry von Doussa Colin Batrouney Michael West Garrett Prestage Iryna Zablotska John de Wit Martin Holt Centre for Social Research in Health Victorian AIDS Council/Gay Men s Health Centre Victorian Department of Health The Kirby Institute Centre for Social Research in Health Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences The University of New South Wales

4 Centre for Social Research in Health John Goodsell Building UNSW Australia UNSW Sydney NSW 05 Australia Tel: Fax: Website: Centre for Social Research in Health 0 ISBN Cover photograph Bigstock/Maridav, reproduced under licence Design and layout by Judi Rainbow The Centre for Social Research in Health is partially funded by the Australian Government Department of Health and is located within Arts & Social Sciences at UNSW Australia. Suggested citation: Lee, E., Mao, L., von Doussa, H., Batrouney, C., West, M., Prestage, G., Zablotska, I., de Wit, J., & Holt, M. (0). Gay Community Periodic Survey: Melbourne 0. Sydney: Centre for Social Research in Health, UNSW Australia.

5 Contents Acknowledgments List of tables Glossary ii iii v Executive summary Key points Demographic profile HIV testing, status and treatment Sexual partnerships and practices Regular male partners Casual male partners Sexual health Recreational drug use 5 Knowledge and use of PEP and PrEP 5 Findings 6 Reporting 6 Tables 6 Appendix A Gay Community Periodic Survey: Melbourne 0 i

6 Acknowledgments We acknowledge the following individuals and organisations for contributing to the success of this project: Victorian Department of Health who funded the project Victorian AIDS Council/Gay Men s Health Centre for ongoing support of the study and assistance in data collection Survey coordinator Henry von Doussa Recruiters who successfully recruited participants at venues and events Survey participants The,87 men who participated in the survey Venues The management and staff of the various gay community venues and clinics who gave permission for the survey to be administered on their premises Centre for Social Research in Health Judi Rainbow ii Gay Community Periodic Survey: Melbourne 0

7 List of tables Table : Recruitment venue 7 Table : Age 7 Table : HIV testing 7 Table : HIV test result 8 Table 5: Use of combination antiretroviral treatment among HIV-positive men at the time of the survey 8 Table 6: Undetectable viral load and CD count among HIV-positive men at the time of the survey, by treatment status 8 Table 7: Relationships with men at the time of the survey 9 Table 8: Agreements with regular male partners about sex within the relationship 9 Table 9: Agreements with regular male partners about sex outside the relationship 0 Table 0: Match of HIV status between regular partners 0 Table : Anal intercourse and condom use with regular partners Table : Unprotected anal intercourse with regular partners, by match of HIV status Table : HIV-negative men who engaged in UAIR and always used riskreduction strategies with partners who were not concordant Table : Anal intercourse and condom use with casual partners Table 5: Any unprotected anal intercourse with casual partners, by HIV status of participants Table 6: Disclosure of HIV status to or from casual partners, by HIV status of participants Table 7: Consistent disclosure of HIV status to casual partners by men who engaged in unprotected anal intercourse, by HIV status of participants Table 8: Positioning in unprotected anal intercourse with casual male partners, by HIV status of participants Table 9: Men who always used risk-reduction strategies when engaging in unprotected anal intercourse with casual partners, by HIV status of participants Table 0: Where men met their male sex partners in the six months prior to the survey 5 Table : STI testing among HIV-positive men in the months prior to the survey 6 Table : STI testing among HIV-negative men in the months prior to the survey 6 Table : Recreational drug use among all men in the six months prior to the survey 7 Gay Community Periodic Survey: Melbourne 0 iii

8 Table : Recreational drug use among HIV-positive men in the six months prior to the survey 8 Table 5: Recreational drug use among HIV-negative men in the six months prior to the survey 8 Table 6: Injecting drug use in the six months prior to the survey, by HIV status of participants 9 Table 7: Party drug use and group sex among all men in the six months prior to the survey 9 Table 8: Knowledge that post-exposure prophylaxis is available 9 iv Gay Community Periodic Survey: Melbourne 0

9 Glossary AIDS acquired immune deficiency syndrome ART antiretroviral treatment HIV human immunodeficiency virus HIV-seroconcordant relationship a relationship in which both partners are of the same HIV status, either HIV-positive or HIV-negative HIV-serodiscordant relationship a relationship in which both partners are known (as a result of testing) to be of different HIV status, e.g. HIV-positive and HIVnegative HIV-serononconcordant relationship a relationship in which the HIV status of at least one partner in the relationship is not known, e.g. HIV-positive and untested, HIV-negative and untested, or both untested HIV status a person s antibody status established by HIV testing, e.g. HIV-negative, HIV-positive, or unknown (untested) PEP post-exposure prophylaxis PrEP pre-exposure prophylaxis STI sexually transmissible infection UAIC unprotected anal intercourse with casual partners UAIR unprotected anal intercourse with regular partners Gay Community Periodic Survey: Melbourne 0 v

10

11 Executive summary The Melbourne Gay Community Periodic Survey is a cross-sectional survey of gay and homosexually active men recruited from a range of gay community sites in Melbourne. The major aim of the survey is to provide data on sexual, drug use and testing practices related to the transmission of HIV and other sexually transmissible infections (STIs) among gay men. The most recent survey, the sixteenth in Melbourne, recruited,87 men in January 0 at gay social venues (e.g. bars), sexon-premises venues, sexual health clinics and the Midsumma Carnival. The response rate was 7.%. The data presented in this report are from the period 00 to 0. From its start in 998, the project has been funded by the Victorian Department of Health and supported by the Victorian AIDS Council and Living Positive Victoria. The Centre for Social Research in Health coordinates the survey with support from the Kirby Institute. Since 00 there has been a significant decrease in the proportion of men recruited at sexual health clinics and sex-on-premises venues and a corresponding increase in the proportion of men recruited from Midsumma Carnival. The proportion of men recruited from social venues has remained stable over time. Key points The proportion of non-hiv-positive men who reported testing for HIV in the months prior to the survey has remained stable and was 7.% in 0. Between 00 and 0, there has been a significant increase in the proportion of HIV-positive men who report taking combination antiretroviral treatment (from 7.5% to 89.0%). In 0, 5.8% of men with regular partners reported any unprotected anal intercourse with those partners (UAIR); no change from 0. In 0, 5.9% of men with casual partners reported any unprotected anal intercourse with those partners (UAIC); this was a significant increase from 0 and is the highest level of UAIC recorded in the survey. In 0, the risk reduction strategy that was most consistently used by HIVpositive men who had UAIC was having an undetectable viral load (57.%), while HIV-negative men who had UAIC were most likely to use serosorting (6.%). The consistent use of serosorting has become much more common among HIVnegative men who have UAIC since 0. Between 0 and 0, there has been a large and significant increase in the use of mobile applications like Grindr to meet male partners (.6% to 6.%). Mobile applications are now the most commonly used way that men in Melbourne meet male sex partners. Gay Community Periodic Survey: Melbourne 0

12 Executive summary Demographic profile As in previous surveys, the men in the sample were primarily of Anglo-Australian background, lived in metropolitan Melbourne or urban Victoria, were well-educated and in full-time employment. The majority of men (7.%) were born in Australia. In 0,.% (n = ) of the sample reported an Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander background. There has been no significant change in the proportion of Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander men in the survey over the last five years. Between 00 and 0, the proportion of younger men aged between 5 to 9 years old in the survey has increased significantly (from 8.5% to.%) while the proportions of men in the other age categories have remained unchanged. HIV testing, status and treatment In 0, nearly nine out of ten men (87.6%) reported having ever been tested for HIV. This was a slight increase, compared with 0. Since 00, the proportion of non-hiv-positive men who reported testing for HIV in the months prior to the survey has remained stable (and was 7.% in 0). Slightly more than half of participants who had ever tested for HIV reported that their last HIV test was at a general practice (n=87, 5.%) and nearly one in ten said it was at a community-based service e.g. Pronto (n= 5, 9.%). Among non-hivpositive men who were tested for HIV in the months prior to the 0 survey, 65 (58.7%) reported having been tested more than once. Among men who reported having ever been tested for HIV in 0, the majority reported that their HIV status was HIV negative (88.0%). Smaller proportions reported being HIV-positive (9.7%) or not knowing their HIV status (.7%). Compared to the previous year, in 0 there was a slight decrease in the proportion of HIV-negative men in the survey from 89.9% to 88.0%. Between 00 and 0, there has been a significant increase in the proportion of HIV-positive men who reported taking combination antiretroviral treatment (ART) at the time of the survey (from 7.5% to 89.0%). In 0, over nine in ten HIV-positive men on treatment reported an undetectable viral load (9.%), but only half of them reported a CD count of more than 500 (n=69) at the time of the survey. In 0, a new question on the number of clinical appointments that HIV-positive men have attended in the last months was added to the questionnaire. Over threequarters of HIV-positive men (n=, 77.0%) reported attending at least three clinical appointments to manage their HIV in the last months. Sexual partnerships and practices At the time of the 0 survey, nearly one-third of men reported being in a monogamous relationship with a male partner (.%). There were slightly smaller proportions of men who reported having casual partners only (6.8%) or having both regular and casual male partners (7.0%). There were % of men who reported no sexual relationships with men at the time of the survey. From 0 to 0, there has been a significant decrease in the proportion of men who reported having both regular and casual male partners (9.6% to 7.0%). The proportions of men in other relationship types have remained stable during the reporting period. Between 0 and 0, there has been a large and significant increase in the proportion of men who report having met men through mobile applications like Grindr (.6% to 6.%). Mobile applications are now the most commonly used way that men in Melbourne meet male sex partners. The next most common way is through the internet (7.8%). Other common ways to meet male sex partners were gay bars (9.%), saunas (6.6%) and meeting men while visiting other Australian Gay Community Periodic Survey: Melbourne 0

13 Executive summary cities (9.%). It is noticeable that the use of physical venues and locations to meet partners has declined significantly over the last 5 years, although this decline has stabilised in the last few years. Regular male partners Among men with regular partners in the six months prior to the 0 survey, over half (58.6%) reported an agreement with their regular partner about sex within the relationship and a slightly smaller proportion (55.8%) reported an agreement about sex outside the relationship. In 0, the most commonly held agreements about sex within a relationship specified that anal intercourse could occur without a condom (.%) or that condoms must always be used for anal intercourse (0.5%). The proportion of men with an agreement that anal intercourse could occur without a condom within the relationship has increased significantly from 6.8% in 00 to.% in 0. The most commonly held agreements about sex outside a relationship specified that casual sex was not allowed (8.%) or that condoms must always be used for anal intercourse with casual partners (.8%). Among HIV-positive men who had regular partners in the six months prior to the 0 survey, there were similar proportions in seroconcordant (6.9%) and serodiscordant (.%) relationships. There was no significant change observed in the relationship types between 0 and 0. HIV-negative men with regular partners continue to be more likely to be in a seroconcordant relationship, compared with HIV-positive men. In 0, most HIVnegative men with regular partners were in a seroconcordant relationship (70.%) and one in four was in a serononconcordant relationship (.9%). A smaller proportion of HIV-negative men reported having a serodiscordant partner (.8%). Since 00, there has been a significant increase in the proportion of HIV-negative men in seroconcordant and serodiscordant relationships and a corresponding decrease in men in serononconcordant relationships. More than half the men with a regular partner in the six months prior to the 0 survey reported any unprotected anal intercourse (UAIR) with their partner (5.8%), while about a quarter reported always using condoms for anal intercourse (.%). About one in five reported having no anal intercourse with their regular partner (0.8%). Between 00 and 0, the proportions of men with regular partners who reported always using condoms for anal intercourse or any unprotected anal intercourse (UAIR) decreased significantly while the proportion reporting no anal intercourse increased. Among HIV-positive participants with regular partners in the six months prior to the 0 survey, similar proportions reported UAIR that was seroconcordant (7.9%) or not concordant (7.9%). More than two in five HIV-positive men with regular partners reported no UAIR (.%). These categories have remained stable between 0 and 0. Compared to HIV-positive men, HIV-negative men with regular partners were more likely to restrict UAIR to seroconcordant partners or avoid UAIR altogether. Among HIV-negative men with regular partners in the six months prior to the 0 survey, there were similar proportions who reported seroconcordant UAIR (.9%) or avoiding UAIR (.%). The remaining.7% of HIV-negative men with regular partners reported UAIR that was not concordant. Among HIV-negative men who reported UAIR with partners who were not seroconcordant in the six months prior to the survey in 0, about one in three men (.%) reported always being the insertive partner (strategic positioning) and 5.% reported consistent withdrawal before ejaculation by their partner. Gay Community Periodic Survey: Melbourne 0

14 Executive summary Casual male partners Use of condoms for anal intercourse remains more common with casual partners than with regular partners. In 0, almost half of men with casual partners in the six months prior to survey reported always using condoms for anal intercourse (6.5%) but more than one-third (5.9%) reported any unprotected anal intercourse (UAIC) prior to the survey. The proportion of men reporting any UAIC increased significantly between 0 and 0 (from.9% to 5.9%), although the trend is stable over time. The 0 level of UAIC appears to be the highest ever recorded in the Melbourne survey. In 0, HIV-positive men with casual partners remained the most likely to report any UAIC (6.%), compared with their HIV-negative counterparts (.0%) and untested/unknown status men (8.7%). The levels of UAIC reported by each HIV status group have remained stable over the last five years. An analysis of UAIC by age group shows that men aged 0-9 years remain the most likely to report UAIC (8.7% in 0), followed by men aged under 0 (6.9%) and men aged 50 or over (.%). The levels of UAIC reported by each of these age groups has remained stable over the last five years. In 0, disclosure of HIV status before sex to any casual partner continued to be more commonly reported by HIV-positive men (75.%) than by HIV-negative men (58.5%). However, similar proportions of HIV-positive men (6.5%) and HIV-negative (58.%) reported HIV disclosure from their casual partners in 0. The proportion of HIV-negative men disclosing their status before sex to any casual partner has increased significantly over the reporting period (from 7.7% in 00 to 58.5% in 0). Similarly, HIV-negative men who had UAIC in the six months prior to the survey have become significantly more likely to report disclosing their HIV status to all their casual partners (9.8% in 00 to 5.% in 0). In 0, new questions were added to the survey about risk reduction strategies during UAIC. Among HIV-positive men who reported UAIC in the six months prior to the 0 survey, over half (57.%) said they always made sure they had an undetectable viral load before UAIC, while one-third (.7%) said that they always made sure that their partners were HIV-positive before sex (serosorting). This suggests that HIV-positive men are more likely to rely on knowledge of their viral load status rather than consistently disclosing HIV status before UAIC. Much smaller proportions (less than 0%) reported always taking the receptive role during UAIC (strategic positioning) or always withdrawing before ejaculation. Among HIV-negative men who reported UAIC in the six months prior to the 0 survey, more than a third (6.%) said they always made sure their partners were HIVnegative before sex. More than one in ten reported consistently taking the insertive role during UAIC (strategic positioning) or that their casual partners always withdrew before ejaculating inside them. Consistent with the previous survey in 0, very few (<%) HIV-negative men reported taking anti-hiv medication before or after UAIC. A minority of HIV-negative men who had UAIC (6.7%) said that when they had an HIV-positive partner, they always ensured he had an undetectable viral load before UAIC. The proportion of HIV-negative men reporting consistent serosorting has increased significantly since 0. Gay Community Periodic Survey: Melbourne 0

15 Executive summary Sexual health As in previous surveys, in 0 a higher proportion of HIV-positive men (90.%) reported having had any sexual health test (including a blood test for syphilis) in the months prior to survey, compared with HIV-negative men (7.%). The proportions of HIV-negative and HIV-positive men reporting any STI testing have remained stable during the reporting period. Between 00 and 0, the proportions of HIV-positive men reporting anal and throat swabs have increased significantly. Among HIV-negative men over the same period, there was a significant increase in throat swabs and a decline in penile swabs. In 0, 60.9% of HIV-negative men and 76.% of HIV-positive men reported a blood test for syphilis. In 0, 8 men (.% of the whole sample) reported having been diagnosed with an STI (other than HIV) in the months prior to the survey. Among these men, more than three-quarters (78.5%) told at least one of their sex partners about their diagnosis and almost half (5.%) told all of their sex partners. Questions on hepatitis C testing and status were added to the 0 questionnaire. In 0, the majority of men reported having been tested for hepatitis C (7.%). Among them, over nine out of ten reported being hepatitis C negative (96.6%) and men (.7%) said they had hepatitis C. Recreational drug use Recreational drug use remains common within the sample, with the most frequently used drugs being amyl/poppers (7.0%), marijuana (9.%), ecstasy (8.6%), Viagra (6.5%), cocaine (.%), amphetamine (.%) and crystal methamphetamine (0.5%). Since 00, there have been significant decreases in the use of ecstasy and amphetamine but a significant increase in the use of crystal methamphetamine. There has been a significant increase in the proportion of men reporting using one or two drugs and a corresponding decrease in the proportion of men reporting using more than two drugs in the six months prior to the survey. In general, HIV-positive men remain more likely to report drug use compared with HIV-negative men. HIV-positive men remain considerably more likely than HIVnegative men to report any injecting drug use (.% vs %.0% in 0). In 0, 5.6% of all men reported using party drugs for sex and 8.8% said they had engaged in group sex during or after drug use in the six months prior to the survey. The proportions of men reporting these practices have declined over time. Knowledge and use of PEP and PrEP In 0, more than two-thirds of men (6.%) reported knowing post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) was available. There was a significant increase in PEP awareness between 0 and 0. New questions about the use of PEP and pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) were added to the questionnaire in 0. Fifty-three non-hiv-positive men (.%) reported taking a prescribed course of PEP after exposure to HIV in the six months prior to the survey. A smaller proportion (n = 8,.%) reported taking anti-hiv medication to reduce their chance of getting HIV (which could be indicative of PrEP). However all but one man who took anti-hiv medication to reduce their chance of getting HIV reported taking prescribed medication as well which suggests confusion with PEP or the repurposing of PEP drugs, given that PrEP is not yet formally available in Australia. Gay Community Periodic Survey: Melbourne 0 5

16 Findings Reporting Data are shown for the period Each table includes the statistical significance, if any, of the change between 0 and 0 and the trend over time (00 0). An alpha level of.05 was used for all statistical tests. Changes between 0 and 0 were assessed with logistic regression (comparing one category with all the others). The p-value of the logistic regression test (if shown) indicates a statistically significant change within that category compared with all the others. For statistically significant trends over time, also tested with logistic regression, the direction of the change (an increase or decrease) is indicated. Where there is no significant change, ns (non-significant) is shown. Where there are low frequencies or data over time are not comparable, tests have not been performed and are marked NA (not applicable). Please exercise caution when interpreting results where there are low frequencies. When data are missing or were not collected in a given year, this is indicated in the table by a dash ( ). Tables The findings of the survey are presented in tables to 8 below. 6 Gay Community Periodic Survey: Melbourne 0

17 Findings Table : Recruitment venue Change from 0 Midsumma Carnival,67 (67.0),8 (6.7),07 (6.7) 658 (70.9) 6 (7.) ns Increase p <.00 Sexual health clinics 55 (6.) 5 (.) (.) 59 (.5) 8 (.0) ns Decrease p <.00 Sex-on-premises venues 85 (.7) 5 (.) 8 (.8) (9.5) 7 (9.) ns Decrease p <.0 Social venues 65 (5.0) (.9) 9 (.) 99 (7.) 7 (7.5) ns ns Total, (00),99 (00),05 (00),9 (00),87(00) Table : Age Change from 0 Under 5 67 (9.) 5 (8.) 65 (7.9) 6 (9.) (7.) ns ns (8.5) 8 (7.6) 6 (7.8) (9.) 9 (.) ns Increase p < (6.8) 55 (8.) 57 (8.0) 65 (7.7) 509 (7.) ns ns (.) (.0) 55 (.) 96 (.) 70 (9.9) ns ns 50 and over 8 (.) 6 (.7) 8 (.9) 96 (.7) 69 (.) ns ns Total,5 (00),9 (00),0 (00),7(00),86 (00) Table : HIV testing Change from 0 All participants Ever tested,09 (85.7),656 (85.9),77 (86.),966 (8.) 69 (87.6) Increase p =.00 ns Total, (00),99 (00),05 (00),9 (00),87 (00) Non-HIV positive participants Tested in previous months 0 (70.) 0 (70.) 5 (69.9) 5 (69.) 06 (7.) ns ns Total,857 (00),76 (00),609 (00),796 (00),70 (00) Gay Community Periodic Survey: Melbourne 0 7

18 Findings Table : HIV test result Change from 0 HIV-positive 5 (0.) 6 (9.7) 56 (8.8) 58 (8.) 59 (9.7) ns ns HIV-negative 80 (86.5) 5 (88.0) 57 (88.69) 750 (89.9) (88.0) Decrease p <.05 Increase p <.05 Unknown status 67 (.) 8 (.) (.) 9 (.0) (.7) ns ns Total,085 (00),65 (00),768 (00),97 (00),66 (00) Note: This table only includes data from men who have been tested for HIV. Table 5: Use of combination antiretroviral treatment among HIV-positive men Change from 0 On treatment 55 (7.5) 9 (76.8) 0 (77.9) (8.) 8 (89.0) ns Increase p =.00 Total 08(00) 55 (00) 5 (00) 8 (00) 55 (00) Table 6: Undetectable viral load and CD count among HIV-positive men, by treatment status Change from 0 Men using ART Undetectable viral load 8 (89.0) (9.) 0 (9.7) (9.) 0 (9.) ns ns CD count > (5.) 6 (50.8) 69 (50.0) ns ns Total 55 (00) 9 (00) 0 (00) (00) 8 (00) Men not using ART Undetectable viral load 0 (7.7) (0.6) 8 (.5) 6 (.) (.5) NA NA CD count > (55.9) 7 (65.) 9 (5.9) NA NA Total 5 (00) 6 (00) (00) 6 (00) 7 (00) 8 Gay Community Periodic Survey: Melbourne 0

19 Findings Table 7: Current relationships with men Change from 0 None 8 (5.6) 5 (6.) 8 (5.9) 9 (.0) ns ns Casual only (.9) 85 (.9) 50 (.) 77 (6.8) ns ns Regular plus casual 5 (9.6) 569 (9.) 589 (6.9) 8 (7.0) ns Decrease p <.05 Regular only (monogamous) 558 (0.9) 580 (9.8) 7 (.0) 57 (.) ns ns Total,805 (00),99 (00),90 (00),780 (00) Note: A formatting error in the 00 questionnaire produced unreliable figures for this question, so they were omitted. Table 8: Agreements with regular male partners about sex within the relationship Change from 0 No agreement about sex within the relationship 679 (.8) 96 (7.) 56 (8.) 597 (7.8) 58 (.) Increase p <.05 ns No sex within the relationship permitted 8 (5.) 0 (.0) 0 (.) 7 (.) (.) ns Decrease p <.00 No anal intercourse permitted 7 (.6) 5 (.8) 5 (.8) 5 (.) (.5) ns Decrease p <.0 Anal intercourse permitted only with a condom 5 (.7) 8 (.6) (.5) 9 (.5) 66 (0.5) ns ns Anal intercourse permitted without a condom 5 (6.8) 7 (.) 57 (.5) 55 (5.0) (.) ns Increase p <.00 Total,6 (00), (00),07 (00),580 (00),99 (00) Note: This table only includes data from men who reported that they had a regular male partner in the six months prior to survey. Gay Community Periodic Survey: Melbourne 0 9

20 Findings Table 9: Agreements with regular male partners about sex outside the relationship Change from 0 No agreement about casual sex 7 (5.) 60 (5.) 6 (5.7) 70 (6.) 57 (.) ns ns No sex with casual partners permitted 00 (.6) 0 (5.5) 5 (.6) 08 (5.8) 65 (8.) ns ns No anal intercourse with casual partners permitted 77 (.7) 6 (.8) 55 (.9) 5 (.9) (.) ns Decrease p =.00 Anal intercourse with casual partners permitted only with a condom 5 (.8) 89 (.7) (.0) 9 (.) 8 (.8) ns ns Anal intercourse with casual partners permitted without a condom 6 (.8) 5 (.6) 0 (.8) 8 (.0) 6 (.8) ns ns Total,6 (00), (00),07 (00),580 (00),99 (00) Note: This table only includes data from men who reported that they had a regular male partner in the six months prior to survey. Table 0: Match of HIV status between regular partners Change from 0 HIV-positive men Seroconcordant 8 (56.) 5 (5.) 6 (.) 9 (.8) (6.9) ns Decrease p <.00 Serodiscordant (.) 9 (7.6) (6.6) (9.) 8 (.) ns Increase p <.0 Serononconcordant (.6) (.0) 5 (.) 9 (5.9) (8.8) ns ns Total 6 (00) 05 (00) (00) (00) (00) HIV-negative men Seroconcordant 67 (9.7) 775 (7.9) 86 (7.5) 88 (7.) 7 (70.) ns Increase p <.00 Serodiscordant (.7) 8 (.6) (.8) 5 (.) 9 (.8) ns Increase p <.05 Serononconcordant 59 (7.7) 6 (.5) 5 (.8) 06 (.7) 56 (.9) ns Decrease p <.00 Total (00),09 (00), (00),0 (00),09 (00) Note: This table only includes data from men who reported that they had a regular male partner in the six months prior to survey. 0 Gay Community Periodic Survey: Melbourne 0

21 Findings Table : Anal intercourse and condom use with regular partners Change from 0 No anal intercourse 97 (.) 0 (.8) (.7) 87 (.5) 70 (0.8) Decrease p <.05 Increase p <.00 Always uses a condom (7.) 6 (5.) 85 (7.) 66 (.) 7 (.) ns Decrease p <.05 Sometimes does not use a condom 985 (60.7) 69 (5.0) 689 (9.0) 87 (5.) 7 (5.8) ns Decrease p.00 Total,6 (00), (00),07 (00),580 (00),99 (00) Note: This table only includes data from men who reported that they had a regular male partner in the six months prior to survey. Table : Unprotected anal intercourse with regular partners, by match of HIV status Change from 0 HIV-positive men Seroconcordant UAIR 68 (6.6) (.0) 6 (.) 0 (6.8) (7.9) ns Decrease p <.00 Not concordant UAIR 7 (5.) 5 (.8) 5 (.) (6.6) (7.9) ns ns No UAIR (8.) 7 (5.) (6.6) (6.6) 9 (.) ns Increase p <.05 Total 6 (00) 05 (00) (00) (00) (00) HIV-negative men Seroconcordant UAIR (.9) 0 (.0) 5 (0.) 59 (.) 5 (.9) ns Increase p <.00 Not concordant UAIR (6.7) 0 (.) (0.) (9.9) (.7) Increase p <.05 Decrease p <.00 No UAIR 90 (9.5) 99 (7.6) 55 (9.8) 568 (5.8) 6 (.) ns ns Total, (00),09 (00), (00),0 (00),09 (00) Note: This table only includes data from men who reported that they had a regular male partner in the six months prior to survey. Table : HIV-negative men who engaged in UAIR and always used risk-reduction strategies with partners who were not concordant Change from 0 Took insertive position during UAIR 00 (0.) 5 (.5) (.) 5 (0.) (.) Increase p <.05 ns Partner withdrew before ejaculation when participant was receptive 55 (6.6) (0.0) 7 (.9) 8 (.8) 0 (5.) ns ns Total (not mutually exclusive) 0 Note: This table only includes data from HIV-negative men who reported UAIR with partners who were not concordant in the six months prior to survey. Gay Community Periodic Survey: Melbourne 0

22 Findings Table : Anal intercourse and condom use with casual partners Change from 0 No anal intercourse 8 (.) 6 (.6) 80 (.) 87 (0.5) 09 (7.6) ns Decrease p <.05 Always uses a condom 70 (.) 57 (.8) 590 (6.) 665 (7.6) 55 (6.5) ns ns Sometimes does not use a condom 550 (.6) (.6) 00 (.5) 6 (.9) 7(5.9) Increase p <.05 ns Total,59 (00),5 (00),70 (00),98 (00),88 (00) Note: This table only includes data from men who reported that they had any casual male partners in the six months prior to survey. Table 5: Any unprotected anal intercourse with casual partners, by HIV status of participants Change from 0 HIV-positive men 0 (60.) 85 (66.) 77 (65.) 7 (6.7) 75 (6.) ns ns Total 68 (00) 8 (00) 8 (00) 0 (00) 7 (00) HIV-negative men 76 (.) 9 (0.7) 8 (8.) 0 (8.0) 97 (.0) ns ns Total,0 (00) 98 (00) 996 (00),085 (00) 99 (00) Untested/unknown status men 7 (.) 8 (.) 0 (5.6) 68 (5.) 55 (8.7) ns ns Total 0 (00) 9 (00) 56 (00) 9 (00) (00) Note: This table only includes data from men who reported that they had any casual male partners in the six months prior to survey. Untested and unknown status includes men who have never been tested for HIV and men who have been tested but do not know their results. Table 6: Disclosure of HIV status to or from casual partners, by HIV status of participants Change from 0 HIV-positive men Told casual partners 9 (70.8) 0 (80.5) 9 (78.8) 9 (75.8) 88 (75.) ns ns Told by casual partners 99 (58.9) 8 (6.) 80 (67.8) 80 (66.7) 7 (6.5) ns ns Total (not mutually exclusive) HIV-negative men Told casual partners 57 (7.7) 97 (5.) 50 (5.) 607 (55.9) 5 (58.5) ns Increase p <.00 Told by casual partners 585 (8.6) 96 (5.) 55 (5.7) 6 (56.5) 5 (58.) ns Increase p <.00 Total (not mutually exclusive), , Note: This table only includes data from men who reported that they had any casual male partners in the six months prior to survey. Gay Community Periodic Survey: Melbourne 0

23 Findings Table 7: Consistent disclosure of HIV status to casual partners among men who engaged in unprotected anal intercourse, by HIV status of participants Change from 0 HIV-positive men who disclosed to all 8 (7.6) (0.0) (.9) (.6) 5 (6.7) ns ns Total 0 (00) 85 (00) 77 (00) 7 (00) 75 (00) HIV-negative men who disclosed to all (9.8) 79 (7.) 98 (.6) 0 (.) (5.) Increase p <.0 Increase p <.00 Total 76 (00) 9 (00) 8 (00) 0 (00) 97 (00) Note: This table only includes data from men who reported that they had any UAIC in the six months prior to survey. Table 8: Positioning in unprotected anal intercourse with casual male partners, by HIV status of participants Change from 0 HIV-positive men Receptive only UAIC (0.8) (.) (5.6) 5 (0.) 5 (0.0) ns ns Total 0 (00) 85 (00) 77 (00) 7 (00) 75 (00) HIV-negative men Insertive only UAIC (5.) 97 (.) 96 (.9) 85 (8.0) 0 (5.0) ns ns Total 76 (00) 9 (00) 8 (00) 0 (00) 97 (00) Note: This table only includes data from men who reported that they had any UAIC in the six months prior to survey. Gay Community Periodic Survey: Melbourne 0

24 Findings Table 9: Men who always used risk reduction strategies when engaging in unprotected anal intercourse with casual partners, by HIV status of participants Change from 0 HIV-positive men Ensured partners were seroconcordant before UAIC (serosorting) 0 (5.) (.) (9.7) 6 (.7) ns ns Took receptive position during UAIC when partners were not concordant (.7) 7 (9.) (.7) (5.) NA NA Participant withdrew before ejaculation when he was insertive (.5) (.7) 7 (9.5) 0 (0.0) NA NA Participant ensured he had an undetectable viral load before having sex 9 (5.7) (57.) ns NA Total (not mutually exclusive) HIV-negative men Ensured partners were seroconcordant before UAIC (serosorting) 7 (5.) 79 (7.9) 87 (8.6) 08 (6.) Increase p <.05 Increase p <.0 Took insertive position during UAIC when partners were not concordant (.) 6 (.7) 7 (.) 9 (.) ns ns Partner withdrew before ejaculation when participant was receptive (.) 7 (9.5) 9 (9.5) 0 (0.) ns ns Ensured HIV-positive partner had an undetectable viral load before having sex 5 (8.) 0 (6.7) ns NA Participant took anti HIV medication before sex 7 (.) (.0) ns NA Participant took anti HIV medication after sex 9 (.0) 8 (.7) ns NA Total (not mutually exclusive) Note: This table only includes data from men who reported having UAIC in the six months prior to the survey. Gay Community Periodic Survey: Melbourne 0

25 Findings Table 0: Where men met their male sex partners in the six months prior to the survey Change from 0 Internet 98 (0.) 77 (0.0) 806 (9.) 86 (5.7) 707 (7.8) ns Decrease p <.0 Mobile app e.g. Grindr 56 (.6) 7 (5.) 90 (8.5) 868 (6.) Increase p <.00 Increase p <.00 Gay bar 907 (7.) 669 (.7) 69 (.) 656 (8.) 59 (9.) ns Decrease p <.00 Gay saunas 869 (5.6) 66 (.5) 67 (0.) 6 (6.) 98 (6.6) ns Decrease p <.00 Dance party 9 (8.0) 70 (.0) 57 (.5) 7 (.7) 8 (.) ns Decrease p <.00 Beat 7 (7.) (6.) 9 (.) 80 (.0) (.) ns Decrease p <.00 Other sex-on-premises venues (7.) 0 (6.6) 77 (.5) (0.) 97 (0.5) ns Decrease p <.00 Private sex parties 95 (8.0) 8 (7.) (6.) (5.6) 6 (6.) ns Decrease p <.0 Sex workers 68 (.8) 6 (.) 6 (.) (.8) (.) ns ns Gym 70 (7.0) 9 (6.) 9 (5.8) 7 (5.) 8 (.) ns Decrease p <.00 In other Australian cities 58 (.8) 96 (0.5) 07 (9.8) 0 (7.) 57 (9.) ns Decrease p <.00 Elsewhere in Australia 8 (5.7) 0 (5.7) 8 (.8) 86 (.) 58 (.8) ns Decrease p <.0 Overseas 58 (.) 60 (8.7) 75 (8.) 98 (7.0) (8.) ns Decrease p <.0 Total (not mutually exclusive),,99,05,9,87 Table : STI testing among HIV-positive men in the months prior to the survey Change from 0 Anal swab (6.) 0 (67.5) 0 (6.) 5 (7.8) (70.) ns Increase p <.05 Throat swab (60.) (68.7) 0 (65.6) 7 (7.) 0 (68.) ns Increase p <.05 Penile swab 0 (7.5) 90 (55.) 77 (9.0) 88 (55.7) 66 (.0) Decrease p <.05 ns Urine sample 60 (7.7) (8.) 09 (69.) (8.9) 6 (78.) ns ns Blood test other than for HIV 7 (79.) 6 (8.) 6 (7.9) 9 (75.) (76.) ns ns Blood test for syphilis 80 (8.0) 9 (85.) 9 (75.8) (8.9) (76.) ns ns Any STI test (not including blood tests) 66 (76.5) (86.5) 5 (7.) (8.8) 9 (80.) ns ns Any STI test (including blood tests) 0 (9.6) 5 (9.6) (8.) (9.) 5 (90.) ns ns Total (not mutually exclusive) Note: From 00, the item Blood test for syphilis was added and included in the calculation for any STI test (including blood tests) Gay Community Periodic Survey: Melbourne 0 5

26 Findings Table : STI testing among HIV-negative men in the months prior to the survey Change from 0 Anal swab 87 (5.) 66 (.7) 709 (5.0) 8 (6.6) 68 (7.) ns ns Throat swab 89 (9.) 68 (5.5) 77 (7.) 878 (9.8) 77 (5.) Increase p <.05 Increase p <.0 Penile swab 696 (8.) 59 (6.) 550 (.9) 6 (6.) 7 (.8) Decrease p <.05 Decrease p <.0 Urine sample,077 (59.) 80 (5.6) 899 (57.0),0 (58.5) 860 (59.6) ns ns Blood test other than for HIV,0 (56.8) 77 (5.0) 8 (5.) 99 (5.) 7 (9.) ns Decrease p <.00 Blood test for syphilis,5 (6.) 80 (5.8) 99 (58.),0 (57.5) 879 (60.9) ns ns Any STI test (not including blood test),0 (6.6) 88 (57.) 95 (59.),09 (6.9) 96 (6.) ns ns Any STI test (including blood tests), (75.) 976 (66.6),00 (69.8), (69.9),0 (7.) ns ns Total (not mutually exclusive),80,66,576,76, Note: From 00, the item Blood test for syphilis was added and included in the calculation for any STI test (including blood tests) 6 Gay Community Periodic Survey: Melbourne 0

27 Findings Table : Recreational drug use among all men in the six months prior to the survey Change from 0 Marijuana 70 (9.9) 5 (7.6) 559 (7.) 67 (7.7) 55 (9.) ns ns Amyl nitrite (poppers) 9 (8.5) 68 (5.) 76 (5.) 78 (.) 69 (7.0) Increase p <.05 ns Ecstasy 70 (0.0) (.5) 7 (8.) 87 (6.6) 9 (8.6) ns Decrease p <.00 Amphetamine (speed) 0 (6.) 9 (5.) 6 (.8) 75 (.8) 6 (.) ns Decrease p <.00 Crystal methamphetamine 9 (7.9) 7 (8.9) 0 (9.8) 05 (8.8) 96 (0.5) ns Increase p <.05 Viagra 9 (6.) 9 (6.5) (6.) 55 (5.) 09 (6.5) ns ns Cocaine 58 (.7) 9 (.) 6 (.7) 97 (.7) 66 (.) ns ns Ketamine (special K) 97 (8.) 6 (6.0) 7 (5.7) 97 (.) 97 (5.) ns Decrease p <.00 GHB 60 (6.6) 5 (6.5) (5.9) 7 (5.0) (6.) ns ns Heroin (.) (.) (.) (0.9) (0.8) ns ns Steroids (.) - - Other drugs 6 (6.7) 6 (8.) 6 (7.9) 70 (7.) (7.0) ns ns Total (not mutually exclusive),,99,05,9,87 Number of drugs used None 976 (0.0) 90 (6.9) 99 (6.),0 (7.) 776 (.5) Decrease p <.00 ns One or two drugs 788 (.) 55 (8.6) 60 (.) 75 (.) 66 (5.) Increase p <.05 Increase p <.0 More than two drugs 678 (7.8) 7 (.6) 6 (.6) 85 (0.7) 5 (.) ns Decrease p <.00 Total, (00),99 (00),05 (00),9 (00),87 (00) Note: Questions about steroid use were not included in the questionnaire between 00 and 0. Gay Community Periodic Survey: Melbourne 0 7

28 Findings Table : Recreational drug use among HIV-positive men in the six months prior to the survey Change from 0 Marijuana 9 (.) 56 (.) 68 (.) 6 (9.) 5 (.5) ns ns Amyl nitrite (poppers) 7 (58.5) 90 (55.) 00 (6.7) 98 (6.0) 8 (5.) ns ns Ecstasy 85 (9.) (7.0) (.0) 0 (5.) 8 (7.) ns Decrease p <.00 Amphetamine (speed) 5 (.5) 9 (7.8) (.0) 5 (.) (.0) Decrease p <.05 ns Crystal methamphetamine 5 (0.7) (5.) 0 (5.5) (7.9) 9 (.) ns ns Viagra 8 (8.7) 68 (.7) 6 (9.5) 6 (9.) 58 (6.0) ns ns Total (not mutually exclusive) Number of drugs used None (0.) 6 (8.) (0.) (.5) (6.7) ns ns One or two drugs 80 (6.9) 9 (0.) 65 (.) 56 (5.) 6 (9.) ns ns More than two drugs 9 (.9) 68 (.7) 60 (8.) 68 (.0) 55 (.) ns ns Total 7 (00) 6 (00) 57 (00) 58 (00) 6 (00) Table 5: Recreational drug use among HIV-negative men in the six months prior to the survey Change from 0 Marijuana 5 (8.8) 05 (7.6) 6 (7.0) 99 (8.) 0 (9.) ns ns Amyl nitrite (poppers) 707 (8.9) 56 (6.6) 586 (7.) 6 (.8) 57 (7.9) ns ns Ecstasy 56 (0.8) (.8) 07 (9.5) 06 (7.) 95 (0.) Increase p <.05 Decrease p <.00 Amphetamine (speed) 07 (6.9) (5.8) 6 (.7) 07 (.8) 8 (.7) ns Decrease p <.00 Crystal methamphetamine (6.8) 8 (8.) 9 (9.5) 5 (8.) (9.8) ns Increase p <.0 Viagra 8 (5.) (6.0) 5 (6.) 6 (.9) 6 (6.) ns ns Total (not mutually exclusive),80,66,576,76, Number of drugs used None 7 (9.) 66 (5.) 696 (.) 78 (.) 58 (0.) Decrease p <.05 ns One or two drugs 60 (.) 7 (9.8) 5 (.6) 6 (.9) 5 (5.6) ns Increase p <.05 More than two drugs 50 (7.7) 65 (.9) 67 (.) 66 (0.8) 7 (.0) Increase p <.05 Decrease p <.00 Total,80 (00),66 (00),576 (00),76 (00), (00) 8 Gay Community Periodic Survey: Melbourne 0

29 Findings Table 6: Injecting drug use in the six months prior to the survey, by HIV status of participants ) Change from 0 All men 9 (.8) 75 (.9) 67 (.) 70 (.0) 59 (.) ns ns Total, (00),99 (00),05 (00),9 (00),87 (00) HIV-positive men 6 (.0) 5 (5.) 6 (6.6) (5.) (.) ns ns Total 7 (00) 6 (00) 57 (00) 58 (00) 6(00) HIV-negative men 9 (.7) 6 (.5) 7 (.) (.9) 9 (.0) ns ns Total,80 (00),66 (00),576 (00),76 (00), (00) Table 7: Party drug use and group sex in the six months prior to the survey Change from 0 Used party drugs for sex 7 (8.) 06 (5.9) 00 (.6) 6 (.8) 9 (5.6) ns Decrease p <.0 Engaged in group sex during or after drug use 95 (.) 97 (0.) 9 (9.) 88 (8.0) 65 (8.8) ns Decrease p <.00 Total (not mutually exclusive),,99,05,9,87 Table 8: Knowledge that post-exposure prophylaxis is available Change from 0 Awareness of PEP among all men,5 (6.),0 (57.),0 (59.),98 (59.8),99 (6.) Increase p <.0 ns Total, (00),99 (00),05 (00),9 (00),87 (00) Awareness of PEP among non-hivpositive men, (60.) 96(5.6),088 (57.),6 (58.0),058 (6.8) Increase p <.05 ns Total,5 (00),766 (00),896 (00),8 (00),7 (00) Gay Community Periodic Survey: Melbourne 0 9

30

31 Appendix Melbo urne Gay Comm munity Periodic Survey 0 Conducted by This is a survey of sexual practices of men who have had sex with w another man in the last five years. This survey is completely anonymous please do not write your name on the questionnaire. Your responses are very important, they provide valuable information that assists in HIV health promotion efforts. PLEASE COMPLETE THE SURVEY ONCEE ONLY. Section A About you. How many of your friends are gay or homosexual men?. How much of your free time is spent with gay or homosexual men?. Do you think of yourself as: Gay/Homosexual Bisexual Other. How old are you? Years 5. Are you of Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander origin? 6. What is your ethnic background? (e.g. Dutch, Greek, Vietnamese, Lebanese) 7. Where were you born? 8. Where do you live? Postcode OR Suburb/Town 9. Are you:. What is the highest level of education you have completed? Page None None No AA few AA little Anglo-Australian Australia Employed full-time Employed part-time On pension/ /social security Up to Year 0 Year / VCE / HSC / QCE / SACE / WACE Tertiary diploma or trade certificate / TAFE University degree Yes Some Some Other Overseas Most A lot A student 5 Unemployed 6 Other 5 Heterosexual (please specify) 0. What is your occupation? (e.g. bartender, teacher, welder) (specify) All Go to sectionn B Section B Your Y sex partners In this survey s we distinguish between REGULAR (boyfriend/lover) and CASUAL partners. Do you currently have sex x with casual male partners? No Yes. Do you currently have sex x with a regular male partner? No Yes. How would you describe your sexual relationship with your current regular male partner? (choose one) 5 We are monogamous neither of us has casual sex Both my partner p and I have casual sex s with other men I have casual sex with other men but my partner does not My partner has casual sex with otherr men but I do not 5 I have several regular male partnerss 6 No currentt regular male e partner Go to Section C 5. If you are in a regular relationship with a man, for how long has it been? Less than 6 months 6 months years More than years 5 Not in a regular relationship with a man 6. Do you have a clear (spoken) agreement with your regular partner about sex within your relationship? No agreement Agreement: No sex at all Agreement: No anal sexx at all Agreement: All anal sexx is with a condom 5 Agreement: Anal sex can be without a condom 7. Do you have a clear (spoken) agreement with your regular partner about sex with casual male partners? No agreement Agreement: No sex at all Agreement: No anal sexx at all Agreement: All anal sex is with a condom Agreement: Anal sex cann be without a condom Go to section C MGCPS 0/- Gay Community Periodic Survey: Melbourne 0 A

32 Section C Sex in the last 6 months 8. How many different men have you had sex with in the last 6 months? 9. In the last 6 months how often have you had sex with men you met at or through: Never Occasionally Internet Mobile app e.g. Grindr Gay bar Dance party Gym Beat Gay sauna Other sex venue Sex workers Private sex parties In other Australian cities Elsewhere in Australia Overseas 0. In the last 6 months, how often did you have group sex involving at least two other men? Section D Regular male partners last 6 months. Have you had sex with regular male partner/s in the last 6 months? Yes In the last 6 MONTHS which of the following havee you done with any of your REGULAR male partner/s?? Anal sex regular partner/s:. I fucked him with a condom.. He fucked me with a condom. None One 5 men Every Week Monthly Never Never 6 0 men 5 0 men 6-50 men No Occasionally Occasionally 7 More than 50 men Once / A few times t Never Go to sectionn D Go to section E Often Often Often. I fucked him without w a condom but pulled out before I came. Never In this survey we Occa distinguish asionally between Often REGULAR 5. He (boyfriend fucked mee d/lover) without and a condom CASUAL but pa pulled artners out. before.. e he came. Never Occasionally Often 6. I fucked him without w a condom and came inside. Never Occasionally Often 7. He fucked mee without a condom and came inside. Never Occasionally Often Go to section E Section E Casual C malee partners last 6 months 8. Have you hadd any sex with any casual male partner/s in the last 6 months? m Yes No Go to section F In the last 6 MONTHS which of the following have you done with any a of your CASUAL male partner/s? Anal sex casual partner/s: : 9. I fucked him with w a condom. Never Occasionally Often 0. He fucked mee with a condom. Never Occasionally Often. I fucked him without w a condom but pulled out before I came. Never Occasionally Often. He fucked mee without a condom but pulled out beforee he came. Never Occasionally Often. I fucked him without w a condom and came inside. Never Occasionally Often. He fucked mee without a condom and came inside. Never Occasionally Often HIV disclosuree casual partner/s 5. How many of your casual partners did you tell your HIV status before sex? None Some All 6. How many of your casual partners told you their HIV status before sex? None Some All Continues at top of page Survey continues on next page Page MGCPS 0/- A Gay Community Periodic Survey: Melbourne 0

33 The following questions are for men who have had any anal sex without w a condom with casual male partner(s) in the last 6 months. If you have not had any anal sex without a condom with casual male partners, go too section F 7. In the last 6 months, if you had anal sex without a condom with any casual male partner(s), did you do any of the following to avoid getting or passingg on HIV? I made sure we weree the same HIV status before we fuckedd without a condom I chose to take the top role (I fucked him) because his HIV status was different or unknown to me I chose to take the bottom role (he fucked me) ) because his HIV status was different or unknown to me When I fucked him, I chose to pull out before cumming because his HIV status was different or unknown to me When he fucked me, I made sure he pulled out before cumming because his HIV status was different or unknown to me I took anti-hiv medication before sex I took anti-hiv medication after sex When my partner was HIV-positive, I checked he had an undetectable viral load before we had sex I knew I had an undetectable viral load beforee we had sex Never Never Never Never Never Never Never Never Never Occasionallyy Occasionallyy Occasionallyy Occasionallyy Occasionallyy Occasionallyy Occasionallyy Occasionallyy Occasionallyy Often Always Often Always Often Always Often Always Often Always Often Always Often Often Often Always Always Always Go to section F Section F HIV testing and HIV statuss 8. Have you ever had an HIV antibody test? No 9. When were you last tested for HIV antibodies? Never tested Less than a week ago weeks ago 6 months ago 0. Based on the results of your HIV antibody tests, what is your HIV status? No test/don tt know Negative. Where did you have your last HIV test? No test/don t know GP Clinic/hospital Gay bar/club/ /sex venue. How many HIV tests have you had in the last months? None (no tests) One test Two tests. If you have a regular partner, do you know the t result of his HIV antibody test? Positive Negative Yes 5 7 months ago 6 years ago 7 years ago 8 More than years ago Positivee 5 At home 6 Community-based service e.g. Pronto 7 Somewhere else - tests 5 5 or more tests I don t know/he hasn t had a test No regular partner Questions continue. If your regularr partner is HIVV positive, what was his last viral load test? Undetectable Detectablee If you are HIV-positiveH please complete the next four questions.. If not, go to section G 5. When were you first diagnosed as HIV-positive? Year 6. In the last months, how many clinical appointments about managing HIVV have you attended? None 7. Are you on combination antiretroviral therapy? Yes No 8. What was your last viral load test? Undetectable Detectablee Don t know/unsure 9. What was your last CD count? < Don t know/unsure No HIV-positive partner or more >500 5 Don t know/unsure Go to section G Survey continues on next page Page MGCPS 0/- Gay Community Periodic Survey: Melbourne 0 A