Register      Login
Sexual Health Sexual Health Society
Publishing on sexual health from the widest perspective
RESEARCH ARTICLE (Open Access)

A cross-sectional study of male and female kissing partners among men who have sex with men

Eric P. F. Chow https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1766-0657 A B C * , Tiffany R. Phillips https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6920-7710 A B , Julien Tran A B , Ei T. Aung https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2560-3233 A B , Kate Maddaford https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5213-1289 A and Christopher K. Fairley https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9081-1664 A B
+ Author Affiliations
- Author Affiliations

A Melbourne Sexual Health Centre, Alfred Health, Melbourne, Vic. 3053, Australia.

B Central Clinical School, Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, Monash University, Melbourne, Vic. 3004, Australia.

C Centre for Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Vic. 3053, Australia.

* Correspondence to: eric.chow@monash.edu

Handling Editor: Ian Simms

Sexual Health 19(1) 27-32 https://doi.org/10.1071/SH21184
Submitted: 22 September 2021  Accepted: 30 November 2021   Published: 4 March 2022

© 2022 The Author(s) (or their employer(s)). Published by CSIRO Publishing. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC-ND)

Abstract

Background: Kissing may be a risk factor for gonorrhoea. Past studies have focused on male kissing partners among men who have sex with men (MSM). This study aimed to examine the kissing practices of MSM who kiss male and female partners.

Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional survey at the Melbourne Sexual Health Centre (MSHC) between March and April 2019. Men attending the MSHC, aged ≥16 years who reported any sexual contact with another man in the previous 12 months were invited to participate in the survey. Data about the number of kissing-only (kissing without sex), kissing-with-sex, and sex-only (having sex without kissing) partners in the previous 3 months were collected. Men were asked to report the number of male and female partners separately.

Results: There were 357 MSM included in the survey. Most men (97.2%, n = 347) had kissed or had sex with another man, whereas 16.0% (n = 57) had kissed or had sex with a female partner in the previous 3 months. Of the 57 men, 26.3% (n = 15) had only kissed a female partner without having sex. The mean number of male partners for kissing-only was 5.5 (s.d. = 6.6), kissing-with-sex was 5.0 (s.d. = 6.6) and sex-only was 3.9 (s.d. = 4.3). The mean number of female partners for kissing-only was 4.2 (s.d. = 6.9), kissing-with-sex was 3.8 (s.d. = 4.9) and sex-only was 3.2 (s.d. = 3.4).

Conclusion: MSM not only kiss men in the absence of sex, but also kiss women in the absence of sex. Gonorrhoea could be transmitted between MSM and women via kissing in the absence of sex.

Keywords: bisexual, gay, gonorrhoea, kiss, pharyngeal, prevention, saliva, sexually transmitted infection, transmission.

Introduction

Rises in gonorrhoea have been reported in many developed countries (including Australia) since the 2010s, and these rises are not only seen in gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men (MSM),1,2 but also in other populations including heterosexuals36 and sex workers.7 Oropharyngeal gonorrhoea is prevalent among MSM with an estimated prevalence of up to 17%.8 However, there have been limited studies estimating the prevalence of oropharyngeal gonorrhoea among heterosexuals because routine universal screening for oropharyngeal gonorrhoea is not recommended for heterosexuals due to the low prevalence of gonorrhoea in the general population.9 Several settings have implemented selective testing for oropharyngeal gonorrhoea among heterosexuals based on risk profiles.1012 It is estimated that 18–46% of heterosexuals reporting sexual contact with partners with gonorrhoea had oropharyngeal gonorrhoea,12 and approximately 40% of heterosexuals diagnosed with urogenital gonorrhoea had oropharyngeal gonorrhoea.11 These data suggest that oropharyngeal gonorrhoea is relatively common in certain groups.

Tongue-kissing (hereafter kissing) has been neglected in sexual health research because it has been traditionally perceived as a negligible risk for HIV and STI transmission; however, evidence has recently emerged suggesting that gonorrhoea may be transmitted through kissing without any sexual contact.13,14 Kissing is the most common activity among sexually active individuals;1517 and thus, understanding kissing practices can provide a better understanding of oropharyngeal gonorrhoea transmission. Past studies have examined same-sex kissing partners among MSM13,1820 or opposite-sex kissing partners among heterosexuals.21,22 Some MSM would also have sex with women and it is unclear how commonly MSM would kiss women with and without sex. Given oropharyngeal gonorrhoea is mostly asymptomatic9 and MSM have a high prevalence of oropharyngeal gonorrhoea,8,23 it is possible that gonorrhoea can be transmitted between MSM and women via kissing in the absence of sex. This study aimed to examine the kissing practices among MSM who kissed men and women.


Methods

We conducted a cross-sectional survey named ‘Annual Sexual Practices and Activities (ASAP)’ at the Melbourne Sexual Health Centre (MSHC) between March and April 2019.22,24,25 The MSHC is the largest public sexual health clinic in Victoria, Australia, and it provided approximately 50 000 consultations in 2019. Clients attending the MSHC are asked to complete a series of questions on demographic characteristics and sexual practices via computer-assisted self-interviewing (CASI) as part of routine care and management. After completing CASI, men aged ≥16 years and who reported having sex with another man in the previous 12 months were invited to participate in the ASAP survey. The ASAP survey collected data on sexual practices that were not asked as part of the routine care (e.g. kissing). Participation was voluntary. Eligible men who agreed to participate in the ASAP survey were asked to provide consent by selecting ‘yes’ before commencing the ASAP survey. Men who declined to participate could select ‘no’ via CASI to discontinue. Ethics approval was obtained from the Alfred Hospital Ethics Committee, Melbourne, Australia (571/17).

Kissing was defined as tongue-kissing in the ASAP survey. Men were asked to report the number of partners in the previous 3 months in the following three categories: (1) kissing-only partners; (2) kissing-with-sex partners; and (3) sex-only partners. Kissing-only partner was defined as tongue-kissing a person without having sex. Kissing-with-sex partner was defined as tongue-kissing and having sex with the same person. Sex-only partner was defined as having sex with a person without tongue-kissing. Men were asked to report the number of male and female partners separately.

Demographic characteristics (i.e. age and country of birth) were extracted from routinely collected data for analysis. We also extracted data on whether men were tested for oropharyngeal gonorrhoea on the day when they completed the survey and its testing results. During the study period, oropharyngeal gonorrhoea was diagnosed using an Aptima Combo 2® Assay (Hologic Panther system; Hologic, San Diego, CA, USA).

Descriptive statistics (e.g. frequency, proportion, mean and s.d.) were calculated for the six outcomes (i.e. male kissing-only partners, male kissing-with-sex partners, male sex-only partners, female kissing-only partners, female kissing-with-sex partners, and female sex-only partners). Proportional 3-Venn diagrams were used to illustrate relationships among the three categories of partners. Each ellipse in the Venn diagram represents the number of men who reported a specific category of partners, the overlapping region represents the number of men who had both categories of partners and the regions that do not overlap represent the number of men who only had one category of partner. Violin plots were used to illustrate the distribution of the number of partners. All statistical analyses were conducted in R (ver. 4.1.1; R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria).


Results

A total of 2053 MSM completed the routine questions on CASI and were invited to participate in ASAP, of which 357 (17.2%) consented to participate. There were no significant differences in mean age and the proportion who were Australia-born between men who participated and those who did not. Furthermore, the proportion of MSM who also had sex with women in the previous 3 months did not differ between men who participated (11.8%) and those who did not (11.7%).

Among the 357 men who completed the survey, the mean age was 32.9 (s.d. = 10.9) years, and half (51.5%, n = 184) of the men were born in Australia. Ten (2.8%) men reported neither kissing nor having sex with a male partner in the previous 3 months. Of the 347 men who had either kissed or had sex with a male partner in the previous 3 months (Fig. 1, Table S1), most (93.4%, n = 324) had male kissing-with-sex partners, with the mean number of partners being 5.5 (s.d. = 6.6) (Fig. 2). Two-thirds (66.0%, n = 229) had male kissing-only partners, and the mean number of partners was 5.0 (s.d. = 6.6). Less than half (48.1%, n = 167) had male sex-only partners, and the mean number of partners was 3.9 (s.d. = 4.3). There was a small proportion who only had male kissing-only partners (1.2%, n = 4) and male sex-only partners (3.7%, n = 13).


Fig. 1.  Proportional 3-Venn diagrams showing the overlap of kissing-only partner (orange), kissing-with-sex partner (blue) and sex-only partner (green) in the previous 3 months among MSM with their male and female partners.
Click to zoom


Fig. 2.  Violin plots showing the distributions of the number of kissing-only, kissing-with-sex and sex-only male and female partners in the previous 3 months among MSM. The red point inside each violin plot represents the mean and the red vertical line on the red point represents the s.d.
Click to zoom

There were 57 (16.0%) men who had either kissed or had sex with a female partner in the previous 3 months; this included 42 (11.8%) men who had sex with a female partner and 15 (4.2%) men who had only kissed a female partner without sex (Fig. 1, Table S1). Of the 37 (64.9%) men who had female kissing-only partners, the mean number of partners was 4.2 (s.d. = 6.9) (Fig. 2). Of the 38 (66.7%) men who had female kissing-with-sex partners, the mean number of partners was 3.8 (s.d. = 4.9). Of the 16 (28.1%) men who had female sex-only partners, the mean number of partners was 3.2 (s.d. = 3.4).

Of the 37 men who had at least one female kissing-only partner, 29 (78.4%) were tested for oropharyngeal gonorrhoea and five (17.2%) tested positive for oropharyngeal gonorrhoea. These five men had a total number of 11 female kissing-only partners.


Discussion

This cross-sectional study provides novel data showing that approximately one in six MSM had kissed or had sex with a female partner. Of these men, almost two-thirds kissed at least one female partner without sex and these men had a relatively high prevalence of oropharyngeal gonorrhoea (17%). If kissing did transmit gonorrhoea, these women would have been infected by their male partners who are MSM via kissing in the absence of sex. Most public health information does not list kissing as a risk factor for gonorrhoea and so these individuals would not consider themselves at risk of either transmitting or acquiring gonorrhoea.26,27

There are several limitations to the study. First, this study was conducted among MSM attending a sexual health clinic in Melbourne and therefore our results may not be generalised to the wider MSM population. Second, we were unable to examine the variations in kissing by age and ethnicity due to the limited sample size. Past studies have reported that kissing practices among heterosexual men who kiss women vary by age and ethnicity.21 Third, our participation rate was low and it is possible that the sample who answered the questionnaire were different from those who did not despite having a similar age, country of birth and the proportion of men who had sex with both men and women. Last, we did not collect sexual identity data and therefore we were unable to distinguish the kissing practices between self-identified gay and bisexual men in this study.

To the best of our knowledge, there have been no other studies examining the kissing practices of female partners of MSM. One study assessed kissing practices of male partners of 3677 MSM and found that the number of kissing-only partners decreases with increasing age, whereas the number of sex-only partners increases with increasing age, but the number of kissing-with-sex partners did not change with age.13 This observation is also applied to heterosexual men where younger heterosexual men have a higher number of female kissing-only partners than older men.21 We did not explore why MSM kiss women in our study, but past studies have shown that some heterosexual individuals reported same-sex kissing because of sexual exploration, social bonding and demonstration of close friendship,28 and these may be similar to the reasons why MSM kiss female partners, but further research will be required to explore this.

Our data showed that kissing practices between the male and female partners of MSM were similar, with one exception; only 1% of the male partners were kissing-only partners, whereas 26% of the female partners were kissing-only partners. If kissing is not considered a risk factor for gonorrhoea, then men and women will not consider that they are at risk of transmitting or acquiring gonorrhoea, but may inadvertently be transmitting infection.

Our findings provide novel data showing some MSM also kiss a female without sex and thus gonorrhoea may be transmitted via kissing between MSM and females. This is also supported by a previous case series of a network of seven men and women attending a music festival in Melbourne; seven individuals all kissed and six of them were diagnosed with oropharyngeal gonorrhoea subsequentially, but none with urogenital gonorrhoea.14 This suggests that these individuals were likely to acquire gonorrhoea via oropharynx–oropharynx contacts (i.e. kissing) than oropharynx–genital contacts (i.e. fellatio or cunnilingus). Other data also support kissing as a route of transmission, including mathematical models and genomic sequencing analysis showing gonorrhoea with the same sequence seen in MSM partners without genital infection.2931 With the concern of antimicrobial resistance to Neisseria gonorrhoeae,32,33 effective interventions are required to prevent and control gonorrhoea in addition to testing. To date, there have been no effective vaccines against N. gonorrhoeae despite much effort being spent on gonorrhoea vaccine development over decades.34 New Zealand introduced a national meningococcal B vaccine (MeNZB) immunsation program for individuals aged up to 20 years in 2004–08.35 A retrospective case-control study in New Zealand has shown that the MeNZB vaccine reduced the incidence of gonorrhoea by 31% over 10 years;36 however, the effectiveness against oropharyngeal gonorrhoea is unknown. Additionally, the use of antiseptic mouthwash has also been proposed as a novel intervention for gonorrhoea;29,3741 however, several clinical trials have demonstrated that daily use of antiseptic mouthwash fails to prevent gonorrhoea acquisition and is an ineffective prevention and treatment.4246 Given that kissing practices are common, a public health message is important to reinforce the awareness that gonorrhoea can be transmitted through kissing.


Supplementary material

Supplementary material is available online.


Data availability

The data that support this study are available in the article and accompanying online supplementary material.


Conflicts of interest

CKF is the Editor-in-Chief of Sexual Health and EPFC is a Joint Editor of Sexual Health, but they were blinded from the peer review process for this paper.


Declaration of funding

EPFC is supported by an Australian National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Emerging Leadership Investigator Grant (GNT1172873). CKF is supported by an Australian NHMRC Leadership Investigator Grant (GNT1172900). This research did not receive any specific funding.


Author contributions

EPFC and CKF conceived and designed the study. KM was involved in study management. EPFC performed data analyses and wrote the first draft of the manuscript. TRP, JT, ETA, KM and CKF assisted with data interpretation. All authors revised the manuscript for intellectual content and approved the final version of the manuscript. The corresponding author had full access to all data in the study and had final responsibility for the decision to submit the paper for publication.



Acknowledgements

We thank Afrizal Afrizal at the MSHC for his assistance with data extraction and Jun Kit Sze for his assistance in implementing the survey on the CASI system at the MSHC.


References

[1]  Chow EPF, Grulich AE, Fairley CK. Epidemiology and prevention of sexually transmitted infections in men who have sex with men at risk of HIV. Lancet HIV 2019; 6 e396–405.
Epidemiology and prevention of sexually transmitted infections in men who have sex with men at risk of HIV.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 31006612PubMed |

[2]  Martín-Sánchez M, Case R, Fairley C, Hocking JS, Bradshaw C, Ong J, et al. 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. BMJ Open 2020; 10 e037608
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.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 33234617PubMed |

[3]  Phillips TR, Fairley CK, Chen MY, Bradshaw CS, Chow EPF. Risk factors for urethral gonorrhoea infection among heterosexual males in Melbourne, Australia: 2007–17. Sex Health 2019; 16 508–13.
Risk factors for urethral gonorrhoea infection among heterosexual males in Melbourne, Australia: 2007–17.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 31203836PubMed |

[4]  Jasek E, Chow EP, Ong JJ, Bradshaw CS, Chen MY, Hocking JS, et al. Sexually transmitted infections in Melbourne, Australia from 1918 to 2016: nearly a century of data. Commun Dis Intell Q Rep 2017; 41 E212–22.
| 29720070PubMed |

[5]  Misson J, Chow EPF, Chen MY, Read TRH, Bradshaw CS, Fairley CK. Trends in gonorrhoea infection and overseas sexual contacts among females attending a sexual health centre in Melbourne, Australia, 2008–2015. Commun Dis Intell 2018; 42 S2209-6051(18)00024-6 https://www1.health.gov.au/internet/main/publishing.nsf/content/79C7257732247646CA2582A6000D6345/$File/Trends%20in%20gonorrhoea%20infection%20and%20overseas%20sexual%20contacts%20among%20females%20attending%20a%20sexual%20health%20centre%20in%20Melbourne%2C%20Australia%2C%202008-2015.pdf

[6]  Chow EPF, Fairley CK, Williamson DA, Chen MY. Spatial mapping of gonorrhoea notifications by sexual practice in Victoria, Australia, 2017–2019. Aust N Z J Public Health 2021; 45 672–74.
Spatial mapping of gonorrhoea notifications by sexual practice in Victoria, Australia, 2017–2019.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 34762335PubMed |

[7]  Chow EP, Williamson DA, Fortune R, Bradshaw CS, Chen MY, Fehler G, et al. Prevalence of genital and oropharyngeal chlamydia and gonorrhoea among female sex workers in Melbourne, Australia, 2015–2017: need for oropharyngeal testing. Sex Transm Infect 2019; 95 398–401.
Prevalence of genital and oropharyngeal chlamydia and gonorrhoea among female sex workers in Melbourne, Australia, 2015–2017: need for oropharyngeal testing.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 31113904PubMed |

[8]  Chan PA, Robinette A, Montgomery M, Almonte A, Cu-Uvin S, Lonks JR, et al. Extragenital infections caused by Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae: a review of the literature. Infect Dis Obstet Gynecol 2016; 2016 5758387
Extragenital infections caused by Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae: a review of the literature.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 27366021PubMed |

[9]  Unemo M, Seifert HS, Hook EW, Hawkes S, Ndowa F, Dillon J-AR. Gonorrhoea. Nat Rev Dis Primers 2019; 5 79
Gonorrhoea.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 31754194PubMed |

[10]  van Liere GAFS, Dukers-Muijrers NHTM, Kuizenga-Wessel S, Wolffs PFG, Hoebe CJPA. Routine universal testing versus selective or incidental testing for oropharyngeal Neisseria gonorrhoeae in women in the Netherlands: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet Infect Dis 2021; 21 858–67.
Routine universal testing versus selective or incidental testing for oropharyngeal Neisseria gonorrhoeae in women in the Netherlands: a retrospective cohort study.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 33444559PubMed |

[11]  Allen C, Fairley CK, Chen MY, Maddaford K, Ong JJ, Williamson DA, et al. Oropharyngeal gonorrhoea infections among heterosexual women and heterosexual men with urogenital gonorrhoea attending a sexual health clinic in Melbourne, Australia. Clin Microbiol Infect 2021; 27 1799–804.
Oropharyngeal gonorrhoea infections among heterosexual women and heterosexual men with urogenital gonorrhoea attending a sexual health clinic in Melbourne, Australia.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 33845205PubMed |

[12]  Chow EPF, Chen MY, Williamson DA, Bradshaw CS, Vodstrcil LA, Trumpour S, et al. Oropharyngeal and genital gonorrhea infections among women and heterosexual men reporting sexual contact with partners with gonorrhea: implication for oropharyngeal testing of heterosexual gonorrhea contacts. Sex Transm Dis 2019; 46 743–7.
Oropharyngeal and genital gonorrhea infections among women and heterosexual men reporting sexual contact with partners with gonorrhea: implication for oropharyngeal testing of heterosexual gonorrhea contacts.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 31517767PubMed |

[13]  Chow EPF, Cornelisse VJ, Williamson DA, Priest D, Hocking JS, Bradshaw CS, et al. Kissing may be an important and neglected risk factor for oropharyngeal gonorrhoea: a cross-sectional study in men who have sex with men. Sex Transm Infect 2019; 95 516–21.
Kissing may be an important and neglected risk factor for oropharyngeal gonorrhoea: a cross-sectional study in men who have sex with men.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 31073095PubMed |

[14]  Cornelisse VJ, Bradshaw CS, Chow EPF, Williamson DA, Fairley CK. Oropharyngeal gonorrhea in absence of urogenital gonorrhea in sexual network of male and female participants, Australia, 2018. Emerg Infect Dis 2019; 25 1373–6.
Oropharyngeal gonorrhea in absence of urogenital gonorrhea in sexual network of male and female participants, Australia, 2018.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 31211673PubMed |

[15]  Kilner A, Fairley CK, Burrell S, Bradshaw CS, Chen MY, Chow EPF. Age pattern of sexual activities with the most recent partner among men who have sex with men in Melbourne, Australia: a cross-sectional study. BMJ Sex Reprod Health 2021; 47 e4
Age pattern of sexual activities with the most recent partner among men who have sex with men in Melbourne, Australia: a cross-sectional study.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 32868336PubMed |

[16]  Herbenick D, Fu T-J, Owens C, Bartelt E, Dodge B, Reece M, et al. Kissing, cuddling, and massage at most recent sexual event: findings from a U.S. nationally representative probability sample. J Sex Marital Ther 2019; 45 159–72.
Kissing, cuddling, and massage at most recent sexual event: findings from a U.S. nationally representative probability sample.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 30040548PubMed |

[17]  Rosenberger JG, Reece M, Schick V, Herbenick D, Novak DS, Van Der Pol B, et al. Sexual behaviors and situational characteristics of most recent male-partnered sexual event among gay and bisexually identified men in the United States. J Sex Med 2011; 8 3040–50.
Sexual behaviors and situational characteristics of most recent male-partnered sexual event among gay and bisexually identified men in the United States.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 21883941PubMed |

[18]  Fairley CK, Hocking JS, Zhang L, Chow EPF. Frequent transmission of gonorrhea in men who have sex with men. Emerg Infect Dis 2017; 23 102–4.
Frequent transmission of gonorrhea in men who have sex with men.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 27983487PubMed |

[19]  Chow EPF, Vodstrcil LA, Fairley CK. Seasonal variations in kissing and sexual activities among men who have sex with men in Melbourne, Australia: implications for seasonal sexually transmissible infection preventions and interventions. Sex Health 2020; 17 149–54.
Seasonal variations in kissing and sexual activities among men who have sex with men in Melbourne, Australia: implications for seasonal sexually transmissible infection preventions and interventions.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 32135076PubMed |

[20]  Chow EPF, Vodstrcil LA, Williamson DA, Maddaford K, Hocking JS, Ashcroft M, et al. Incidence and duration of incident oropharyngeal gonorrhoea and chlamydia infections among men who have sex with men: prospective cohort study. Sex Transm Infect 2021; 97 452–7.
Incidence and duration of incident oropharyngeal gonorrhoea and chlamydia infections among men who have sex with men: prospective cohort study.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 33208509PubMed |

[21]  Charleson FJ, Fairley CK, Hocking JS, Vodstrcil LA, Bradshaw CS, Chow EPF. Age, ethnic and travel-related disparities in kissing and sexual practices among heterosexual men in Melbourne, Australia. Sex Health 2020; 17 279–87.
Age, ethnic and travel-related disparities in kissing and sexual practices among heterosexual men in Melbourne, Australia.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 32571477PubMed |

[22]  Constantinou H, Fairley CK, Hocking JS, Bradshaw CS, Choi EPH, Maddaford K, et al. Associations between methods of meeting sexual partners and sexual practices among heterosexuals: cross-sectional study in Melbourne, Australia. JMIR Form Res 2021; 5 e26202
Associations between methods of meeting sexual partners and sexual practices among heterosexuals: cross-sectional study in Melbourne, Australia.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 34283024PubMed |

[23]  Chow EPF, Tomnay J, Fehler G, Whiley D, Read TRH, Denham I, et al. Substantial increases in chlamydia and gonorrhea positivity unexplained by changes in individual-level sexual behaviors among men who have sex with men in an Australian sexual health service from 2007 to 2013. Sex Transm Dis 2015; 42 81–7.
Substantial increases in chlamydia and gonorrhea positivity unexplained by changes in individual-level sexual behaviors among men who have sex with men in an Australian sexual health service from 2007 to 2013.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |

[24]  Phillips TR, Fairley CK, Bradshaw CS, Hocking JS, Choi EPH, Ong JJ, et al. Brief report: group sex among men who have sex with men in the era of PrEP: a cross-sectional study. JAIDS J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr 2021; 86 e23–7.
Brief report: group sex among men who have sex with men in the era of PrEP: a cross-sectional study.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 33093332PubMed |

[25]  Chow EPF, Hocking JS, Bradshaw CS, Phillips TR, Tabesh M, Donovan B, et al. Paying for sex among males and females: a cross-sectional survey in Melbourne, Australia. Sex Transm Dis 2021; 48 195–9.
Paying for sex among males and females: a cross-sectional survey in Melbourne, Australia.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 33555761PubMed |

[26]  Workowski KA, Bachmann LH, Chan PA, Johnston CM, Muzny CA, Park I, et al. Sexually transmitted infections treatment guidelines, 2021. MMWR Recomm Rep 2021; 70 1–187.
Sexually transmitted infections treatment guidelines, 2021.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 34292926PubMed |

[27]  Communicable Diseases Section, Victorian Government Department of Human Services. The blue book: guidelines for the control of infectious diseases. Melbourne: State of Victoria, Department of Human Services; 2005. Available at: https://www2.health.vic.gov.au/Api/downloadmedia/%7B0F5A8C5D-8DEC-43D0-8388-7F49067E1BCA%7D [cited 31 August 2021].

[28]  Anderson E, Ripley M, McCormack M. A mixed-method study of same-sex kissing among college-attending heterosexual men in the U.S. Sex Cult 2019; 23 26–44.
A mixed-method study of same-sex kissing among college-attending heterosexual men in the U.S.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |

[29]  Zhang L, Regan DG, Chow EPF, Gambhir M, Cornelisse V, Grulich A, et al. Neisseria gonorrhoeae transmission among men who have sex with men: an anatomical site-specific mathematical model evaluating the potential preventive impact of mouthwash. Sex Transm Dis 2017; 44 586–92.
Neisseria gonorrhoeae transmission among men who have sex with men: an anatomical site-specific mathematical model evaluating the potential preventive impact of mouthwash.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 28876289PubMed |

[30]  Xu X, Chow EPF, Ong JJ, Hoebe C, Williamson D, Shen M, et al. Modelling the contribution that different sexual practices involving the oropharynx and saliva have on Neisseria gonorrhoeae infections at multiple anatomical sites in men who have sex with men. Sex Transm Infect 2021; 97 183–9.
Modelling the contribution that different sexual practices involving the oropharynx and saliva have on Neisseria gonorrhoeae infections at multiple anatomical sites in men who have sex with men.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 33208511PubMed |

[31]  Cornelisse VJ, Williamson D, Zhang L, Chen MY, Bradshaw C, Hocking JS, et al. Evidence for a new paradigm of gonorrhoea transmission: cross-sectional analysis of Neisseria gonorrhoeae infections by anatomical site in both partners in 60 male couples. Sex Transm Infect 2019; 95 437–42.
Evidence for a new paradigm of gonorrhoea transmission: cross-sectional analysis of Neisseria gonorrhoeae infections by anatomical site in both partners in 60 male couples.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 30996106PubMed |

[32]  Wi T, Lahra MM, Ndowa F, Bala M, Dillon J-AR, Ramon-Pardo P, et al. Antimicrobial resistance in Neisseria gonorrhoeae: global surveillance and a call for international collaborative action. PLoS Med 2017; 14 e1002344
Antimicrobial resistance in Neisseria gonorrhoeae: global surveillance and a call for international collaborative action.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 28686231PubMed |

[33]  Williamson DA, Fairley CK, Howden BP, Chen MY, Stevens K, De Petra V, et al. Trends and risk factors for antimicrobial-resistant Neisseria gonorrhoeae, Melbourne, Australia, 2007 to 2018. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2019; 63 e01221–19.
Trends and risk factors for antimicrobial-resistant Neisseria gonorrhoeae, Melbourne, Australia, 2007 to 2018.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 31383663PubMed |

[34]  Gottlieb SL, Jerse AE, Delany-Moretlwe S, Deal C, Giersing BK. Advancing vaccine development for gonorrhoea and the Global STI Vaccine Roadmap. Sex Health 2019; 16 426–32.
Advancing vaccine development for gonorrhoea and the Global STI Vaccine Roadmap.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 31476278PubMed |

[35]  Arnold R, Galloway Y, McNicholas A, O’Hallahan J. Effectiveness of a vaccination programme for an epidemic of meningococcal B in New Zealand. Vaccine 2011; 29 7100–6.
Effectiveness of a vaccination programme for an epidemic of meningococcal B in New Zealand.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 21803101PubMed |

[36]  Petousis-Harris H, Paynter J, Morgan J, Saxton P, McArdle B, Goodyear-Smith F, Black S. Effectiveness of a group B outer membrane vesicle meningococcal vaccine against gonorrhoea in New Zealand: a retrospective case-control study. Lancet 2017; 390 1603–10.
Effectiveness of a group B outer membrane vesicle meningococcal vaccine against gonorrhoea in New Zealand: a retrospective case-control study.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 28705462PubMed |

[37]  Fairley CK, Zhang L, Chow EPF. New thinking on gonorrhoea control in MSM: are antiseptic mouthwashes the answer? Curr Opin Infect Dis 2018; 31 45–9.
New thinking on gonorrhoea control in MSM: are antiseptic mouthwashes the answer?Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 29176445PubMed |

[38]  Chow EPF, Maddaford K, Trumpour S, Fairley CK. Translating mouthwash use for gonorrhoea prevention into a public health campaign: identifying current knowledge and research gaps. Sex Health 2019; 16 433–41.
Translating mouthwash use for gonorrhoea prevention into a public health campaign: identifying current knowledge and research gaps.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 31099331PubMed |

[39]  Van Dijck C, Cuylaerts V, Sollie P, Spychala A, De Baetselier I, Laumen J, et al. The development of mouthwashes without anti-gonococcal activity for controlled clinical trials: an in vitro study. F1000Res 2019; 8 1620
The development of mouthwashes without anti-gonococcal activity for controlled clinical trials: an in vitro study.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 32089824PubMed |

[40]  Chow EP, Howden BP, Walker S, Lee D, Bradshaw CS, Chen MY, et al. Antiseptic mouthwash against pharyngeal Neisseria gonorrhoeae: a randomised controlled trial and an in vitro study. Sex Transm Infect 2017; 93 88–93.
Antiseptic mouthwash against pharyngeal Neisseria gonorrhoeae: a randomised controlled trial and an in vitro study.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 27998950PubMed |

[41]  Xu X, Chow EPF, Shen M, Zou Z, Wang C, Ong JJ, et al. Potential effect of antiseptic mouthwash on the incidence of Neisseria gonorrhoeae among men who have sex with men: a mathematical modelling study. BMJ Open 2021; 11 e052823
Potential effect of antiseptic mouthwash on the incidence of Neisseria gonorrhoeae among men who have sex with men: a mathematical modelling study.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 34620667PubMed |

[42]  Chow EPF, Williamson DA, Hocking JS, Law MG, Maddaford K, Bradshaw CS, et al. Antiseptic mouthwash for gonorrhoea prevention (OMEGA): a randomised, double-blind, parallel-group, multicentre trial. Lancet Infect Dis 2021; 21 647–56.
Antiseptic mouthwash for gonorrhoea prevention (OMEGA): a randomised, double-blind, parallel-group, multicentre trial.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 33676595PubMed |

[43]  Chow EPF, Fairley CK. Is it the end of mouthwash as an intervention for gonorrhoea? Lancet Infect Dis 2021; 21 763–4.
Is it the end of mouthwash as an intervention for gonorrhoea?Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 34051184PubMed |

[44]  Chow EPF, Maddaford K, Hocking JS, Bradshaw CS, Wigan R, Chen MY, et al. An open-label, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial of antiseptic mouthwash versus antibiotics for oropharyngeal gonorrhoea treatment (OMEGA2). Sci Rep 2020; 10 19386
An open-label, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial of antiseptic mouthwash versus antibiotics for oropharyngeal gonorrhoea treatment (OMEGA2).Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 33168910PubMed |

[45]  Van Dijck C, Tsoumanis A, Rotsaert A, Vuylsteke B, Van den Bossche D, Paeleman E, et al. Antibacterial mouthwash to prevent sexually transmitted infections in men who have sex with men taking HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PReGo): a randomised, placebo-controlled, crossover trial. Lancet Infect Dis 2021; 21 657–67.
Antibacterial mouthwash to prevent sexually transmitted infections in men who have sex with men taking HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PReGo): a randomised, placebo-controlled, crossover trial.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 33676596PubMed |

[46]  Van Dijck C, Tsoumanis A, De Hondt A, Cuylaerts V, Laumen J, Van Herrewege Y. Chlorhexidine mouthwash fails to eradicate oropharyngeal gonorrhea in a clinical pilot trial (MoNg). Sex Transm Dis 2022; 49 e38–41.
Chlorhexidine mouthwash fails to eradicate oropharyngeal gonorrhea in a clinical pilot trial (MoNg).Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 34282741PubMed |