Self-reported STI Yes No Total Yes No Total N N N N N N Mean Standard deviation Mean Standard deviation Mean Standard deviation Mean Standard deviation Mean Standard deviation Mean Standard deviation Variable Condom problem score Number UAI partners Condom problem score Number UAI partners Condom proficiency score Number UAI partners Condom proficiency score Number UAI partners Condom proficiency score 1.93 44 2.07 1.29 267 1.84 1.38 311 1.88 1.77 99 1.68 1.36 347 1.43 1.45 446 1.50 Estimate −0.154 −1.073 0.049 −1.608 −0.113 −1.133 0.114 0.484 Goodall et al. BMC Public Health 2012, 12:747 http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2458/12/747 Table 4 Tests of association between condom proficiency and condom problem scores and self-reported STIs over the previous 12 months Source Community Clinic Sample Clinic Community Clinic Community p 0.012 0.032 Condom problem score 1.33 45 1.82 1.54 274 2.40 1.51 319 2.33 1.97 97 1.95 1.26 348 1.54 1.41 445 1.67 Page 6 of 8 p 0.757 0.001 of ongoing high-risk behavior in some MSM there is clearly a continuing need for interventions to promote condom use to successfully reduce STI acquisition. Men at high risk of HIV in Scotland are in contact with prevention services [21] and interventions are likely to be acceptable [22]. A UK study to determine whether condom thickness affects condom breakage found that user characteristics, including lack of confidence in con- dom use, rather than condom characteristics were asso- ciated with condom breakage among MSM [23]. Although clinic based behavioral interventions have been proven to reduce the risk of STIs in a large rando- mized controlled trial [24] it is recognised that these interventions are resource intensive and recent work has focused on reducing the duration and frequency of inter- ventions. Recent studies have shown a reduction in re- peat STIs following a single session of condom skills training delivered to young heterosexual African Ameri- can men by a lay health adviser [25]. A small pilot study of home based condom skills training showed some im- provement in measures of condom self-efficacy and re- duction in condom errors in 30 young heterosexual men [26]. The condom self-efficacy and error scores used in that study had high internal consistency but have not been shown to be indicators of STI risk. There is good evidence that intensive multi-session clinic based brief Table 5 Logistic regressions illustrating contribution of multiple variables in predicting the likelihood of self-reported STI diagnosis 95% CI −2.178 – −1.493 −1.602 – −0.543 −0.133 – 0.232 −2.457 – −0.758 −0.264 – 0.038 −1.645 – −0.621 −0.150 – 0.295 −2.613 – −0.715 p 0.029 <0.001 0.596 <0.001 0.144 <0.001 0.524 0.001