Transgender youth are disproportionately affected by HIV, particularly minoritized youth in the US south. To understand HIV service use among transgender youth, we interviewed 25 young racial and ethnic minority clients of four southern community-based HIV service organizations (CBOs), and CBO staff (n = 12), about service access and use. Participants were assigned male at birth and identified as female (n = 8), transgender (n = 11) or gender-fluid or nonbinary (n = 6). The majority were Black/African American or mixed race; four were Hispanic or Latino/a. Most were unemployed; nearly half were unstably housed or homeless during the prior year. Four service types were each used by approximately two-thirds of participants: counseling/support, HIV/STD testing/education, pre-exposure prophylaxis education/prescriptions, and transgender-related medical services (primarily hormone provision). Just over a quarter used social services (e.g., housing, employment). Key facilitators to service use included a non-stigmatizing CBO atmosphere, and easy and convenient access. Poor access (e.g., inconvenient hours, location), lack of transportation or parking, social service needs, and lack of money were barriers. Qualitative reports highlighted unmet social service needs, particularly housing, especially for those without HIV. To reduce disparities, HIV prevention for racial and ethnic minoritized transgender youth should simultaneously address hormone provision, HIV risk reduction and social service needs.

During 2018, gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (MSM) accounted for 69.4% of all diagnoses of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection in the United States (1). Moreover, in all 42 jurisdictions with complete laboratory reporting of CD4 and viral load results,* percentages of MSM linked to care within 1 month (80.8%) and virally suppressed (viral load <200 copies of HIV RNA/mL or interpreted as undetected) within 6 months (68.3%) of diagnosis were below target during 2018 (2). African American/Black (Black), Hispanic/Latino (Hispanic), and younger MSM disproportionately experience HIV diagnosis, not being linked to care, and not being virally suppressed. To characterize trends in these outcomes, CDC analyzed National HIV Surveillance System(†) data from 2014 to 2018. The number of diagnoses of HIV infection among all MSM decreased 2.3% per year (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.9-2.8). However, diagnoses did not significantly change among either Hispanic MSM or any MSM aged 13-19 years; increased 2.2% (95% CI = 1.0-3.4) and 2.0% (95% CI = 0.6-3.3) per year among Black and Hispanic MSM aged 25-34 years, respectively; and were highest in absolute count among Black MSM. Annual percentages of linkage to care within 1 month and viral suppression within 6 months of diagnosis among all MSM increased (2.9% [95% CI = 2.4-3.5] and 6.8% [95% CI = 6.2-7.4] per year, respectively). These findings, albeit promising, warrant intensified prevention efforts for Black, Hispanic, and younger MSM.

BACKGROUND: HIV-infected men who have sex with men (MSM) are at increased risk for transmitting and acquiring sexually transmitted diseases (STDs). Guidelines recommend at least annual screening of HIV-infected MSM for syphilis and for chlamydia and gonorrhea at exposed anatomical sites, to protect their health and their sexual partners' health. Despite these guidelines, STD screening has been suboptimal, with very low nongenital chlamydia and gonorrhea testing rates. Our objective was to better understand barriers encountered by HIV care providers in adhering to STD screening guidelines for HIV-infected MSM. METHODS: We conducted 40 individual semistructured interviews with health care providers (physicians, midlevel providers, nurses, and health educators) of HIV-infected MSM at 8 large HIV clinics in 6 US cities. Providers were asked about their STD screening practices and barriers to conducting sexual risk assessments of their patients. Emerging themes were identified by qualitative data analysis. RESULTS: Although most health care providers reported routine syphilis screening, screening for chlamydia and gonorrhea at exposed anatomical sites was less frequent. Obstacles that prevented routine chlamydia and gonorrhea screening included time constraints, difficulty obtaining a sexual history, language and cultural barriers, and patient confidentiality concerns. CONCLUSIONS: Providers reported many obstacles to routine chlamydia and gonorrhea screening. Interventions are needed to help to mitigate barriers to STD screening, such as structural and patient-directed health services models that might facilitate increased testing coverage of these important preventive services.