PURPOSE: We sought to assess the potential acceptability of intravaginal rings (IVRs) as an HIV prevention method among at-risk women and men. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative assessment of initial attitudes toward IVRs, current HIV prevention methods, and common behavioral practices among female sex workers (FSWs) and men who frequent FSWs in Mukuru, an urban slum community in Nairobi, Kenya. Nineteen women and 21 men took part in six focus group discussions. RESULTS: Most participants, both male and female, responded positively to the concept of an IVR as a device for delivering microbicides. Women particularly liked the convenience offered by its slow-release capacity. Some female respondents raised concerns about whether male customers would discover the ring and respond negatively, whereas others thought it unlikely that their clients would feel the ring. Focus groups conducted with male clients of FSWs suggested that many would be enthusiastic about women, and particularly sex workers, using a microbicide ring, but that women's fears about negative responses to covert use were well founded. Overall, this high-risk population of FSWs and male clients in Nairobi was very open to the IVR as a potential HIV prevention device. CONCLUSION: Themes that emerged from the focus groups highlight the importance of understanding attitudes toward IVRs as well as cultural practices that may impact IVR use in high-risk populations when pursuing clinical development of this potential HIV prevention device.
PURPOSE: We sought to assess the potential acceptability of intravaginal rings (IVRs) as an HIV prevention method among at-risk women and men. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative assessment of initial attitudes toward IVRs, current HIV prevention methods, and common behavioral practices among female sex workers (FSWs) and men who frequent FSWs in Mukuru, an urban slum community in Nairobi, Kenya. Nineteen women and 21 men took part in six focus group discussions. RESULTS: Most participants, both male and female, responded positively to the concept of an IVR as a device for delivering microbicides. Women particularly liked the convenience offered by its slow-release capacity. Some female respondents raised concerns about whether male customers would discover the ring and respond negatively, whereas others thought it unlikely that their clients would feel the ring. Focus groups conducted with male clients of FSWs suggested that many would be enthusiastic about women, and particularly sex workers, using a microbicide ring, but that women's fears about negative responses to covert use were well founded. Overall, this high-risk population of FSWs and male clients in Nairobi was very open to the IVR as a potential HIV prevention device. CONCLUSION: Themes that emerged from the focus groups highlight the importance of understanding attitudes toward IVRs as well as cultural practices that may impact IVR use in high-risk populations when pursuing clinical development of this potential HIV prevention device.
Authors: J H van De Wijgert; P R Mason; L Gwanzura; M T Mbizvo; Z M Chirenje; V Iliff; S Shiboski; N S Padian Journal: J Infect Dis Date: 2000-02 Impact factor: 5.226
Authors: Margaret E Bentley; Andrew M Fullem; Elizabeth E Tolley; Clifton W Kelly; Neelam Jogelkar; Namtip Srirak; Liness Mwafulirwa; Gertrude Khumalo-Sakutukwa; David D Celentano Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2004-07 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: E Pleasants; T Tauya; K Reddy; B G Mirembe; K Woeber; T Palanee-Phillips; C Zimba; M Atujuna; E T Montgomery Journal: AIDS Behav Date: 2020-03
Authors: Sara E Vargas; Miriam M Midoun; Melissa Guillen; Melissa L Getz; Kristen Underhill; Caroline Kuo; Kate M Guthrie Journal: Perspect Sex Reprod Health Date: 2019-05-20
Authors: Louise A Ouattara; Patrick Barnable; Paul Mawson; Samantha Seidor; Thomas M Zydowsky; Larisa Kizima; Aixa Rodriguez; José A Fernández-Romero; Michael L Cooney; Kevin D Roberts; Agegnehu Gettie; James Blanchard; Melissa Robbiani; Natalia Teleshova Journal: Antimicrob Agents Chemother Date: 2014-03-10 Impact factor: 5.191
Authors: Ryan S Teller; David C Malaspina; Rachna Rastogi; Justin T Clark; Igal Szleifer; Patrick F Kiser Journal: J Control Release Date: 2015-12-23 Impact factor: 9.776
Authors: John A Moss; Amanda M Malone; Thomas J Smith; Sean Kennedy; Etana Kopin; Cali Nguyen; Josh Gilman; Irina Butkyavichene; Kathleen L Vincent; Massoud Motamedi; David R Friend; Meredith R Clark; Marc M Baum Journal: Antimicrob Agents Chemother Date: 2011-11-28 Impact factor: 5.191
Authors: Pedro M M Mesquita; Rachna Rastogi; Theodore J Segarra; Ryan S Teller; N Merna Torres; Ashley M Huber; Patrick F Kiser; Betsy C Herold Journal: J Antimicrob Chemother Date: 2012-03-30 Impact factor: 5.790
Authors: John A Moss; Amanda M Malone; Thomas J Smith; Irina Butkyavichene; Cassandra Cortez; Joshua Gilman; Sean Kennedy; Etana Kopin; Cali Nguyen; Preetha Sinha; R Michael Hendry; Patricia Guenthner; Angela Holder; Amy Martin; Janet McNicholl; James Mitchell; Chou-Pong Pau; Priya Srinivasan; James M Smith; Marc M Baum Journal: Antimicrob Agents Chemother Date: 2012-09-10 Impact factor: 5.191
Authors: Todd J Johnson; Meredith R Clark; Theodore H Albright; Joel S Nebeker; Anthony L Tuitupou; Justin T Clark; Judit Fabian; R Tyler McCabe; Neelima Chandra; Gustavo F Doncel; David R Friend; Patrick F Kiser Journal: Antimicrob Agents Chemother Date: 2012-09-24 Impact factor: 5.191