Abstract
Objectives To develop a classification of sexual partner types for use in partner notification (PN) and other interventions to prevent sexually transmitted infections (STI).
Methods A four-step process: 1) an iterative synthesis of five sources of evidence: scoping review of social and health sciences literature on partner types; analysis of relationship types in dating apps; systematic review of PN intervention content; review of PN guidelines; qualitative interviews with public, patients and health professionals, to generate an initial comprehensive classification; 2) multidisciplinary clinical expert consultation to revise the classification; 3) piloting of the revised classification in sexual health clinics during a randomised controlled trial of PN; 4) application of the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) to identify index patients’ willingness to engage in PN for each partner type.
Results Five main partner types emerged from the evidence synthesis and consultation: ‘Established partner’, ‘New partner’, ‘Occasional partner’, ‘One-off partner’ and ‘Sex worker’. The types differed across several dimensions, including likely perceptions of sexual exclusivity, likelihood of sex reoccurring between index patient and sex partner. Sexual health professionals found the classification easy to operationalise. During the trial, they assigned all 3288 partners described by 2223 index patients to a category. The TDF analysis suggested that the partner types might be associated with different risks of STI reinfection, onward transmission and index patients’ engagement with PN.
Discussion We developed an evidence-informed, useable classification of five sexual partner types to underpin PN practice and other STI prevention interventions. Analysis of biomedical, psychological and social factors that distinguish different partner types shows how each could warrant a tailored PN approach. This classification could facilitate the use of partner-centred outcomes. Additional studies are needed to determine the utility of the classification to improve measurement of the impact of PN strategies and help focus resources.
Key messages
Current classifications of sexual partners limit understanding of STI transmission dynamics and hinder targeting and tailoring of partner notification interventions.
The limits and constraints of current classifications, together with recent socio-sexual changes, mean that a new classification is needed.
We developed a comprehensive, evidence-based classification of sexual partner types for use in partner notification that characterised and distinguished between partner and partnership types.
The five partner categories were readily adopted and easily operationalised in UK sexual health services.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Clinical Protocols
https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/10/3/e034806
Funding Statement
This work presents independent research funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) under its Programme Grants for Applied Research Programme (reference number RP-PG-0614-20009). The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care. The funders had no role in study design, collection, management, analysis and interpretation of data; writing of the report and the decision to submit the report for publication.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Ethical approval received from Glasgow Caledonian University Research Ethics Committee (HLS/PSWAHS/A15/256) and NHS Ethics Approval (16/NI/0211) were obtained. Trial: Ethical approval received from London Chelsea Research Ethics Committee (18/LO/0773).
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
Data are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request
