1. COMPARISON OF TWO MEDIA/MARKETING CAMPAIGNS FOR SYPHILIS IN INDIANAPOLIS DAWNE DIORIO REKAS, M.P.A. CATHERINE LESKO, M.P.H. JANET ARNO, M.D.

3. Syphilis Trends in Central Indiana

4. 1999-2000 2008-2009 Syphilis in Marion County: 2 outbreaks

5. Target Populations 2000 2008 African American Heterosexuals (no significant HIV) MSM (~60% previously diagnosed HIV) Indianapolis, low SES zip codes Indianapolis, moderate-high SES zip codes Sex for drugs (crack)/money Internet, public venues

7. Components of Message Delivery Item 2000 2008 Cost $100,000 plus evaluation $25,000 Bus Cards X X Billboards X 0 Radio XXXXXX X TV XXXX 0 Print X X Posters X X Palm Cards X X Internet Awareness/PS 0 X Timing of Messages Staged (deliberate) On approval (incidental) Testing of Messages Focus Groups None

8. 2000 Campaign

9. 2000 Campaign

10. Used in Both Campaigns

11. Used in 2008 Campaign

14. Results 2000 2008 69% recalled campaign 72% claimed they had recently seen/heard something about syphilis before the media campaign, compared to only 67% after Of these, 23% took action Of those who heard something before the campaign, 50% got tested. Of those who heard something after the campaign, only 31% got tested Standard for successful marketing campaigns = 3-5% take action Those that heard the syphilis message before the media campaign were more likely to have been tested in the past 3 months (41% compared to 22%) or in the past year (73% compared to 39%).

15. Analysis – Lessons Learned 2000 2008 Target population not knowledgeable about syphilis or general health matters Target population very knowledgeable Target population very concerned about syphilis and motivated to avoid infection Target population not concerned and not motivated Much larger budget, professional planning and implementation Small budget, no formative research or professional planning of campaign Message deliberately developed by focus group No focus group; Message developed by committee; diluted by media placement needs Outbreak linked to an issue important to activities (neighborhoods) Outbreak not linked to issue of importance (may be due to no significant input by MSM)