Literature DB >> 10091191

Safer sex strategies for women: the hierarchical model in methadone treatment clinics.

Z Stein1, H Saez, W el-Sadr, C Healton, S Mannheimer, P Messeri, M M Scimeca, N Van Devanter, R Zimmerman, P Betne.   

Abstract

Women clients of a methadone maintenance treatment clinic were targeted for an intervention aimed to reduce unsafe sex. The hierarchical model was the basis of the single intervention session, tested among 63 volunteers. This model requires the educator to discuss and demonstrate a full range of barriers that women might use for protection, ranking these in the order of their known efficacy. The model stresses that no one should go without protection. Two objections, both untested, have been voiced against the model. One is that, because of its complexity, women will have difficulty comprehending the message. The second is that, by demonstrating alternative strategies to the male condom, the educator is offering women a way out from persisting with the male condom, so that instead they will use an easier, but less effective, method of protection. The present research aimed at testing both objections in a high-risk and disadvantaged group of women. By comparing before and after performance on a knowledge test, it was established that, at least among these women, the complex message was well understood. By comparing baseline and follow-up reports of barriers used by sexually active women before and after intervention, a reduction in reports of unsafe sexual encounters was demonstrated. The reduction could be attributed directly to adoption of the female condom. Although some women who had used male condoms previously adopted the female condom, most of those who did so had not used the male condom previously. Since neither theoretical objection to the hierarchical model is sustained in this population, fresh weight is given to emphasizing choice of barriers, especially to women who are at high risk and relatively disempowered. As experience with the female condom grows and its unfamiliarity decreases, it would seem appropriate to encourage women who do not succeed with the male condom to try to use the female condom, over which they have more control.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10091191      PMCID: PMC3456711          DOI: 10.1007/BF02344462

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Urban Health        ISSN: 1099-3460            Impact factor:   3.671


  6 in total

Review 1.  Comparative contraceptive efficacy of the female condom and other barrier methods.

Authors:  J Trussell; K Sturgen; J Strickler; R Dominik
Journal:  Fam Plann Perspect       Date:  1994 Mar-Apr

2.  Barrier contraceptives and sexually transmitted diseases in women: a comparison of female-dependent methods and condoms.

Authors:  M J Rosenberg; A J Davidson; J H Chen; F N Judson; J M Douglas
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1992-05       Impact factor: 9.308

Review 3.  Female-controlled methods to prevent sexual transmission of HIV.

Authors:  C J Elias; C Coggins
Journal:  AIDS       Date:  1996-12       Impact factor: 4.177

4.  The acceptability of the female condom among low-income African-American women.

Authors:  D O Shervington
Journal:  J Natl Med Assoc       Date:  1993-05       Impact factor: 1.798

5.  Protection against sexually transmitted diseases by granting sex workers in Thailand the choice of using the male or female condom: results from a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  A L Fontanet; J Saba; V Chandelying; C Sakondhavat; P Bhiraleus; S Rugpao; C Chongsomchai; O Kiriwat; S Tovanabutra; L Dally; J M Lange; W Rojanapithayakorn
Journal:  AIDS       Date:  1998-10-01       Impact factor: 4.177

6.  Prevention of vaginal trichomoniasis by compliant use of the female condom.

Authors:  D E Soper; D Shoupe; G A Shangold; M M Shangold; J Gutmann; L Mercer
Journal:  Sex Transm Dis       Date:  1993 May-Jun       Impact factor: 2.830

  6 in total
  8 in total

1.  The efficacy of a relationship-based HIV/STD prevention program for heterosexual couples.

Authors:  Nabila El-Bassel; Susan S Witte; Louisa Gilbert; Elwin Wu; Mingway Chang; Jennifer Hill; Peter Steinglass
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 9.308

Review 2.  Interventions for encouraging sexual behaviours intended to prevent cervical cancer.

Authors:  Jonathan P Shepherd; Geoff K Frampton; Petra Harris
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2011-04-13

3.  Sexual barrier acceptability among multiethnic HIV-positive and at-risk women.

Authors:  Olga Villar-Loubet; Deborah Jones; Drenna Waldrop-Valverde; Laura Bruscantini; Stephen Weiss
Journal:  J Womens Health (Larchmt)       Date:  2011-03       Impact factor: 2.681

4.  A brief sexual barrier intervention for women living with AIDS: acceptability, use, and ethnicity.

Authors:  D L Jones; S M Weiss; R Malow; M Ishii; J Devieux; H Stanley; A Cassells; J N Tobin; E Brondolo; A LaPerriere; J Efantis-Potter; M J O'Sullivan; N Schneiderman
Journal:  J Urban Health       Date:  2001-12       Impact factor: 3.671

5.  Ourselves, our bodies, our realities: an HIV prevention intervention for women with severe mental illness.

Authors:  P Y Collins; P A Geller; S Miller; P Toro; E S Susser
Journal:  J Urban Health       Date:  2001-03       Impact factor: 3.671

Review 6.  The female condom: tool for women's empowerment.

Authors:  E L Gollub
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2000-09       Impact factor: 9.308

7.  Preaching to the choir: preference for female-controlled methods of HIV and sexually transmitted disease prevention.

Authors:  S T Murphy; L C Miller; J Moore; L F Clark
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2000-07       Impact factor: 9.308

8.  The efficacy of female condom skills training in HIV risk reduction among women: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Kyung-Hee Choi; Colleen Hoff; Steven E Gregorich; Olga Grinstead; Cynthia Gomez; Wendy Hussey
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2008-08-13       Impact factor: 9.308

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.