Advertisement

AIDS and Behavior

, Volume 19, Issue 10, pp 1919–1927 | Cite as

The Use of Mystery Shopping for Quality Assurance Evaluations of HIV/STI Testing Sites Offering Services to Young Gay and Bisexual Men

  • José A. BauermeisterEmail author
  • Emily S. Pingel
  • Laura Jadwin-Cakmak
  • Steven Meanley
  • Deepak Alapati
  • Michael Moore
  • Matthew Lowther
  • Ryan Wade
  • Gary W. Harper
Original Paper

Abstract

Young men who have sex with men (YMSM) are at increased risk for HIV and STI infection. While encouraging HIV and STI testing among YMSM remains a public health priority, we know little about the cultural competency of providers offering HIV/STI tests to YMSM in public clinics. As part of a larger intervention study, we employed a mystery shopper methodology to evaluate the LGBT cultural competency and quality of services offered in HIV and STI testing sites in Southeast Michigan (n = 43).We trained and deployed mystery shoppers (n = 5) to evaluate the HIV and STI testing sites by undergoing routine HIV/STI testing. Two shoppers visited each site, recording their experiences using a checklist that assessed 13 domains, including the clinic’s structural characteristics and interactions with testing providers. We used the site scores to examine the checklist’s psychometric properties and tested whether site evaluations differed between sites only offering HIV testing (n = 14) versus those offering comprehensive HIV/STI testing (n = 29). On average, site scores were positive across domains. In bivariate comparisons by type of testing site, HIV testing sites were more likely than comprehensive HIV/STI testing clinics to ascertain experiences of intimate partner violence, offer action steps to achieve safer sex goals, and provide safer sex education. The developed checklist may be used as a quality assurance indicator to measure HIV/STI testing sites’ performance when working with YMSM. Our findings also underscore the need to bolster providers’ provision of safer sex education and behavioral counseling within comprehensive HIV/STI testing sites.

Keywords

Men who have sex with men Cultural competency Performance Sex education 

Resumen

Los hombres jóvenes que tienen sexo con otros hombres (JHCH) tienen mayor riesgo de contraer VIH y otras enfermedades transmitidas sexualmente (ETS). La promoción de pruebas de VIH/ETS entre los JHCH sigue siendo una prioridad de salud pública; sin embargo, sabemos poco acerca de la competencia cultural de los proveedores que ofrecen pruebas de VIH/ETS a JHCH en clínicas públicas. Como parte de un estudio de intervención, utilizamos la metodología del cliente misterioso para evaluar la competencia cultural y la calidad de los servicios ofrecidos durante el testeo de VIH y ETS en el sudeste de Michigan (n = 43). Entrenamos a 5 clientes misteriosos a evaluar los servicios ofrecidos al someterse a pruebas rutinarias de VIH/ETS. Dos clientes misteriosos visitaron cada clínica, registrando sus experiencias utilizando un instrumento que evaluó 13 dimensiones, incluyendo las características estructurales de la clínica y las interacciones con los proveedores. Utilizamos los puntajes del sitio para examinar las propiedades psicométricas del instrumento y evaluar si las puntuaciones diferían entre clínicas que sólo ofrecen la prueba del VIH (n = 14) y las clínicas que ofrecen las pruebas comprehensivas de VIH/ETS (n = 29). En promedio, los puntajes de las dimensiones fueron positivos. En comparaciones entre los dos tipos de clínica, las clínicas que sólo ofrecen VIH fueron más propensas que las clínicas con pruebas comprehensivas en tener puntajes mas positivos en las áreas de experiencias de violencia entre pareja, pasos para alcanzar los objetivos de sexo seguro, y educación sexual. El instrumento desarrollo puede ser utilizado como un índice para medir el desempeño de clínicas donde se le ofrecen pruebas de VIH/ETS a JHCH. Nuestros resultados también reiteran la necesidad de reforzar la provisión de educación sexual y consejería entre proveedores de pruebas de VIH/ETS.

Notes

Acknowledgments

We thank our Community Advisory Board and Youth Advisory Board for their contributions during the development and implementation of this project.

References

  1. 1.
    Michigan Department of Community Health. Annual HIV Surveillance Report, Michigan 2014. 2014. http://www.michigan.gov/documents/mdch/January_2014_ALL_446611_7.pdf. Cited 4 Aug 2014.
  2. 2.
    Michigan Department of Community Health. Michigan 2013 Sexually Transmitted Diseases Report. 2014. http://www.mdch.state.mi.us/pha/osr/Index.asp?Id=12. Cited 4 Aug 2014.
  3. 3.
    Tanner AE, Philbin MM, Duval A, Ellen J, Kapogiannis B, Fortenberry JD. The adolescent trials network for HIV/AIDS interventions. “Youth friendly” clinics: considerations for linking and engaging HIV-infected adolescents into care. AIDS Care. 2014;26:199–205.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    World Health Organization (WHO). Adolescent friendly health services: an agenda for change. Geneva: WHO; 2002.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Fenton KA. Changing epidemiology of HIV/AIDS in the United States: implications for enhancing and promoting HIV testing strategies. Clin Infect Dis. 2007;45:S213–20.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Marks G, Crepaz N, Janssen RS. Estimating sexual transmission of HIV from persons aware and unaware that they are infected with the virus in the USA. AIDS. 2006;20:1447–50.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Mustanski B, Garofalo R, Monahan C, Gratzer B, Andrews R. Feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary efficacy of an online HIV prevention program for diverse young men who have sex with men: the keep it up! intervention. AIDS Behav. 2013;17:2999–3012.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bauermeister JA, Pingel ES, Jadwin-Cakmak L, Harper GW, Horvath K, Weiss G, et al. Acceptability and preliminary efficacy of a tailored online HIV/STI testing intervention for young men who have sex with men: the get connected! program. AIDS Behav. 2015:1–15. doi: 10.1007/s10461-015-1009-y.
  9. 9.
    Muessig KE, Baltierra NB, Pike EC, LeGrand S, Hightow-Weidman LB. Achieving HIV risk reduction through HealthMpowerment.org, a user-driven eHealth intervention for young Black men who have sex with men and transgender women who have sex with men. Digit Cult Educ. 2014;6:164–82.PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Society for Adolescent Health and Medicine. Recommendations for promoting the health and well-being of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender adolescents: a position paper of the Society for adolescent health and medicine. J Adolesc Health. 2013;52:506–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Rasberry CN, Morris E, Lesesne CA, Kroupa E, Topete P, Carver LH, et al. Communicating with school nurses about sexual orientation and sexual health: perspectives of teen young men who have sex with men. J Sch Nurs. 2014. doi: 10.1177/1059840514557160.
  12. 12.
    Israel T, Walther WA, Gortcheva R, Perry JS. Policies and practices for LGBT clients: perspectives of mental health services administrators. J Gay Lesbian Ment Health. 2011;15:152–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Baker K. Where do we go from here? Incorporating LGBT-inclusive health policies in affordable care act implementation. LGBTQ Policy J. 2011;2:61–71.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Harper GW. Sex isn’t that simple: culture and context in HIV prevention interventions for gay and bisexual male adolescents. Am Psychol. 2007;62:806–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Betancourt JR, Green AR, Carrillo JE, Park ER. Cultural competence and health care disparities: key perspectives and trends. Health Aff. 2005;24:499–505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hoffman ND, Freeman K, Swann S. Healthcare preferences of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and questioning youth. J Adolesc Health. 2009;45:222–9.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Wilkerson JM, Rybicki S, Barber CA, Smolenski DJ. Creating a culturally competent clinical environment for LGBT patients. J Gay Lesbian Soc Serv. 2011;23:376–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Granatino R, Verkamp J. Stephen Parker R. The use of secret shopping as a method of increasing engagement in the healthcare industry: a case study. Int J Healthc Manag. 2013;6:114–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ford RC, Latham GP, Lennox G. Mystery shoppers: a new tool for coaching employee performance improvement. Organ Dyn. 2011;40:157–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Rhodes K. Taking the mystery out of “mystery shopper” studies. N Engl J Med. 2011;365:484–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Steinman KJ, Kelleher K, Dembe AE, Wickizer TM, Hemming T. The use of a “mystery shopper” methodology to evaluate children’s access to psychiatric services. J Behav Health Serv Res. 2012;39:305–13.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Russell NK, Boekeloo BO, Rafi IZ, Rabin DL. Unannounced simulated patients’ observations of physician STD/HIV prevention practices. Am J Prev Med. 1992;8:235–40.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Sykes S, O’Sullivan K. A “mystery shopper” project to evaluate sexual health and contraceptive services for young people in Croydon. J Fam Plann Reprod Health Care. 2006;32:25–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    French AC, Kaunitz AM. Pharmacy access to emergency hormonal contraception in Jacksonville, FL: a secret shopper survey. Contraception. 2007;75:126–30.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Higgins SJ, Hattingh HL. Requests for emergency contraception in community pharmacy: an evaluation of services provided to mystery patients. Res Soc Adm Pharm. 2013;9:114–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Lenehan GP. “Secret patients”: a dangerous, demoralizing practice. J Emerg Nurs. 2004;30:524.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Kim JO, Mueller CW. Introduction to factor analysis: what it is and how to do it. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications; 1978.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    United States White House. National HIV/AIDS Strategy for the United States. Washington, DC; 2010. http://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/eop/onap/nhas.
  29. 29.
    Weinhardt LS, Carey MP, Johnson BT, Bickham NL. Effects of HIV counseling and testing on sexual risk behavior: a meta-analytic review of published research, 1985-1997. Am J Public Health. 1999;89:1397–405.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Mustanski BS, Newcomb ME, Du Bois SN, Garcia SC, Grov C. HIV in young men who have sex with men: a review of epidemiology, risk and protective factors, and interventions. J Sex Res. 2011;48:218–53.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Pingel ES, Thomas L, Harmell C, Bauermeister JA. Creating comprehensive, youth centered, culturally appropriate sex education: what do young gay, bisexual, and questioning men want? Sex Res Soc Policy. 2013;10:293–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Rhodes KV, Miller FG. Simulated patient studies: an ethical analysis. Milbank Q. 2012;90:706–24.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Triviño X, Ferrer L, Bernales M, Cianelli R, Moore P, Peragallo N. Effect of emotionally complex roles on HIV-related simulated patients. Hisp Health Care Int. 2013;11:72–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • José A. Bauermeister
    • 1
    Email author
  • Emily S. Pingel
    • 1
  • Laura Jadwin-Cakmak
    • 1
  • Steven Meanley
    • 1
  • Deepak Alapati
    • 1
  • Michael Moore
    • 1
  • Matthew Lowther
    • 1
  • Ryan Wade
    • 1
  • Gary W. Harper
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Health Behavior & Health Education, Center for Sexuality and Health Disparities, School of Public HealthUniversity of MichiganAnn ArborUSA

Personalised recommendations