Medical Education - Research Publications

Permanent URI for this collection

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 5 of 5
  • Item
    No Preview Available
    Universal lymphogranuloma venereum (LGV) testing of rectal chlamydia in men who have sex with men and detection of asymptomatic LGV
    Hughes, Y ; Chen, MY ; Fairley, CK ; Hocking, JS ; Williamson, D ; Ong, JJ ; De Petra, V ; Chow, EPF (BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP, 2022-12)
    BACKGROUND: Lymphogranuloma venereum (LGV) is caused by Chlamydia trachomatis serovars L1-L3. This study determined the positivity for LGV testing before and after introduction of universal LGV testing of positive rectal Chlamydia trachomatis samples in men who have sex with men (MSM). METHODS: From March 2015 to February 2018, MSM with rectal C. trachomatis were not routinely tested for LGV at the Melbourne Sexual Health Centre unless they had HIV or symptoms of proctitis. From February 2018, universal testing for LGV of all positive rectal C. trachomatis specimens in men over the age of 25 years, regardless of symptoms was undertaken. LGV positivity was defined as the detection of LGV-associated C. trachomatis serovars. RESULTS: There were 3429 and 4020 MSM who tested positive for rectal chlamydia in the selective and universal LGV-testing periods, respectively. Of the total 3027 assessable specimens in both periods, 97 (3.2%; 95% CI 2.6% to 3.9%) specimens tested positive for LGV. LGV positivity in the selective testing period was higher than in the universal testing period (6.6% (33/502) vs 2.5% (64/2525), p<0.001). The proportion of LGV cases that were asymptomatic increased from 15.2% (5/33) in the selective testing period to 34.4% (22/64) in the universal testing period (p=0.045). Of the 70 symptomatic LGV cases symptoms included rectal discharge (71.4%, n=45) and rectal pain (60.0%, n=42). CONCLUSION: Universal LGV testing of all positive rectal chlamydia samples in MSM compared with selective testing led to the detection of asymptomatic rectal LGV, which constituted 34% of rectal LGV cases.
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    The duration and body position during tongue-kissing among heterosexual men and women
    Tran, J ; Fairley, CKK ; Ong, JJJ ; Bradshaw, CSS ; Aung, ETT ; Maddaford, K ; Chen, MYY ; Hocking, JSS ; Chow, EPF (FRONTIERS MEDIA SA, 2022-12-22)
    BACKGROUND: Emerging data suggest tongue-kissing may transmit gonorrhea. We aim to examine the duration or body position of heterosexual men and women during tongue-kissing (henceforth, known as kissing). METHODS: A cross-sectional survey among heterosexual men and women attending the Melbourne Sexual Health Centre in Australia between May 2019 and March 2020 collected data on the duration and body position (i.e., on top of or lying down underneath) of their most recent kissing partner in the past 3 months. Univariable and multivariable linear regressions were performed to examine the association between gender and kissing duration. RESULTS: Of 2,866 individuals, 93.6% (n = 2,683) had at least one kissing partner in the past 3 months, which included 1,342 (50.1%) men and 1,341 (49.9%) women, and 87.2% (n = 2,339) had sex with their opposite-gender kissing partner. The adjusted mean duration of kissing with the most recent opposite-gender kissing partner did not differ between men and women (12.2 vs. 11.5 min, p = 0.170). More men were on top of their most recent opposite-gender kissing partner compared to women (87.9 vs. 82.9%, p < 0.001). Men reported a longer kissing duration than women when they were on top of the opposite-gender kissing partner (8.3 vs. 7.4 min, p = 0.006). More women had same-gender kissing partners than men (9.6 vs. 2.8%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Men spending longer than women on top of their opposite-gender kissing partner suggests a potential alternative explanation for oropharyngeal gonorrhea being seen more commonly in women. Further research should investigate whether body positioning and duration of kissing influence the risk of gonorrhea transmission.
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Kissing, fellatio, and analingus as risk factors for oropharyngeal gonorrhoea in men who have sex with men: A cross-sectional study
    Tran, J ; Ong, JJ ; Bradshaw, CS ; Chen, MY ; Kong, FYS ; Hocking, JS ; Aung, ET ; Maddaford, K ; Fairley, CK ; Chow, EPF (ELSEVIER, 2022-09)
    BACKGROUND: Our aim was to determine whether exposure to the anatomical sites (oropharynx, penis, or anus) of male partners of men who have sex with men (MSM) were independent risk factors for oropharyngeal gonorrhoea after adjusting for exposures to these sites. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, we invited MSM who attended the Melbourne Sexual Health Centre (MSHC) in Victoria, Australia between 26-November 2018 and 31-December 2020 to complete a survey of their sexual practices in the past three months. We collected data on the number of male partners with whom men engaged in sexual activities that exposed their oropharynx to their partners' oropharynx (kissing), penis (fellatio), and anus (rimming or analingus). Only men who were aged ≥16 years, tested for oropharyngeal gonorrhoea and did not have indeterminate or invalid results were included in the final analysis. We conducted univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses to investigate associations between oropharyngeal gonorrhoea and the three exposures to the oropharynx. FINDINGS: The median age of the 2,322 men who completed the survey was 31 years (IQR: 26-40), and 5·2% (n = 120) were diagnosed with oropharyngeal gonorrhoea. Our univariate analysis showed that oropharyngeal gonorrhoea was significantly associated with increasing number of kissing (p trend<0·0001), rimming (p trend<0·0001) and fellatio (p trend<0·0001) partners. After adjusting for all three exposures, oropharyngeal gonorrhoea was associated with increasing number of kissing (p trend =0·014) and rimming partners (p trend = 0·037) but not fellatio (p trend = 0·61). INTERPRETATION: Our data suggest kissing and rimming are important practices in oropharyngeal gonorrhoea transmission in MSM Novel interventions which target the oropharynx are required for gonorrohoea prevention. FUNDING: Australian National Health and Medical Research Council.
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Comparison of gastrointestinal side effects from different doses of azithromycin for the treatment of gonorrhoea
    Ong, JJ ; Aguirre, I ; Unemo, M ; Kong, FYS ; Fairley, CK ; Hocking, JS ; Chow, EPF ; Tieosapjaroen, W ; Ly, J ; Chen, MY (OXFORD UNIV PRESS, 2022-06-29)
    OBJECTIVES: Azithromycin is commonly used to treat Neisseria gonorrhoeae. We compared its gastrointestinal side effects using 1 g single, 2 g single or 2 g split (i.e. 1 g plus 1 g 6-12 h later) dosing, representing our clinic's changing guidelines over the study period. METHODS: We recruited consecutive sexual health clinic patients who received azithromycin (and 500 mg ceftriaxone) for uncomplicated gonorrhoea. Each patient received a text message 48 h after their attendance to complete a questionnaire. RESULTS: Patients received 1 g single (n = 271), 2 g single (218) or 2 g split (105) doses. Vomiting was less common for 1 g versus 2 g single dose [1.1% versus 3.7%; risk difference (RD): -2.6%; 95% CI: -0.2 to -5.4] and 2 g split versus 2 g single dose (0.9% versus 3.7%; RD: -2.8%; 95% CI: -0.3 to -5.8). Nausea was less common for 1 g versus 2 g single dose (13.7% versus 43.1%; RD: -29.5%; 95% CI: -21.7 to -37.2) and 2 g split versus 2 g single dose (16.4% versus 43.1%; RD: -26.8; 95% CI: -17.2 to -36.3). Diarrhoea was less common for 1 g versus 2 g single dose (25.5% versus 50.9%; RD: -25.5%; 95% CI: -17.0 to -33.9) and 2 g split versus 2 g single dose (30.9% versus 50.9%; RD: -20.0; 95% CI: -9.1 to -30.9). Almost all were willing to retake the same dosing for gonorrhoea in the future: 97% for 1 g single; 94% for 2 g single; and 97% for 2 g split dose. CONCLUSIONS: Azithromycin 2 g split dose for gonorrhoea resulted in significantly less vomiting, nausea and diarrhoea than a 2 g single dose.
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Trends and differences in sexual practices and sexually transmitted infections in men who have sex with men only (MSMO) and men who have sex with men and women (MSMW): a repeated cross-sectional study in Melbourne, Australia
    Martin-Sanchez, M ; Case, R ; Fairley, C ; Hocking, JS ; Bradshaw, C ; Ong, J ; Chen, MY ; Chow, EPF (BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP, 2020)
    OBJECTIVES: In the 2010s, there has been an increase in sexually transmitted infections (STI) in men who have sex with men (MSM) in Australia, and since 2015 also in urban heterosexuals. Men who have sex with both men and women (MSMW) have characteristics that may differ from both men who have sex with men only (MSMO) and heterosexual men. We aimed to compare the sexual practices and the trends in HIV/STI positivity between MSMO and MSMW. DESIGN: Repeated cross-sectional study. SETTING: A sexual health centre in Melbourne, Australia. PARTICIPANTS: MSM aged 18 years and above who attended the Melbourne Sexual Health Centre for the first time between 2011 and 2018. This includes 12 795 MSMO and 1979 MSMW. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Demographic characterics, sexual practices and HIV/STI positivity. RESULTS: Compared with MSMW, MSMO were more likely to practice anal sex and to have condomless receptive anal sex with casual male partners, and less likely to have a current regular relationship. Over the 8-year period, there was an increase in condomless receptive anal sex with casual male partners for both groups (MSMO: from 46.2% to 63.3%, ptrend <0.001; MSMW: from 41.3% to 57.9%, ptrend=0.011). Syphilis positivity increased in MSMO (from 5.5% to 7.9%, ptrend=0.012) and MSMW (from 0.9% to 6.4%, ptrend=0.004) and HIV remained stable. Gonorrhoea increased among MSMO from 2011 to 2014 (from 6.7% to 9.6%, ptrend=0.002), and remained stable from 2015 to 2018. MSMO had higher odds of testing positive for gonorrhoea (adjusted OR (aOR) 1.36, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.64), chlamydia (aOR 1.39, 95% CI 1.16 to 1.67), syphilis (aOR 1.74, 95% CI 1.37 to 2.22) and HIV (aOR 4.60, 95% CI 2.43 to 8.70) than MSMW. CONCLUSIONS: MSMW have overall lower condomless sex and lower HIV/STI positivity. In the last years, changes in sexual practices in MSM have affected both MSMW and MSMO leading to an increased STI risk.