| Literature DB >> 23555618 |
Suzanna C Francis1, Kathy Baisley, Shelley S Lees, Bahati Andrew, Flavia Zalwango, Janet Seeley, Judith Vandepitte, Trong T Ao, Janneke van de Wijgert, Deborah Watson-Jones, Saidi Kapiga, Heiner Grosskurth, Richard J Hayes.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Intravaginal practices (IVP) are highly prevalent in sub-Saharan African and have been implicated as risk factors for HIV acquisition. However, types of IVP vary between populations, and detailed information on IVP among women at risk for HIV in different populations is needed. We investigated IVP among women who practice transactional sex in two populations: semi-urban, facility workers in Tanzania who engage in opportunistic sex work; and urban, self-identified sex workers and bar workers in Uganda. The aim of the study was to describe and compare IVP using a daily pictorial diary. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPALEntities:
Mesh:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23555618 PMCID: PMC3608607 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0059085
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Figure 1The vaginal practice diary in Tanzania.
There are two pages for each day. On page one there are four rows to report individual acts of cleansing. If a participant ticks a cleansing box then the adjoining horizontal rows must be ticked or crossed to describe that act of cleansing. One page two there are two insertion rows to report individual acts of insertion, with adjoining horizontal rows to describe each act. There are five boxes at the bottom of page two in which a participant reports more than 4 acts of cleansing, more than two acts of insertion, menstruation, vaginal discomfort, and number of times she had sex on that day. The Ugandan diary is identical to the Tanzania diary except the pictures were adapted by a local Ugandan artist.
Comparison of the Tanzanian and Ugandan cohorts and the sub-samples of women enrolled for the Diary Study.
| Tanzanianmain cohort(n = 970) | TanzanianDiary Study participants(n = 100) | Ugandanmain cohort(N = 1027) | UgandanDiary Study participants(n = 100) | Comparison of Diary Study Participants by country | |
|
| p = 0.38a | p = 0.27a | p = 0.04b | ||
| <25 | 395 (40.7%) | 43 (43.0%) | 412 (40.1%) | 32 (32.0%) | |
| 25-29 | 246 (25.4%) | 23 (23.0%) | 337 (32.8%) | 34 (34.0%) | |
| 30-34 | 150 (15.5%) | 11 (11.0%) | 168 (16.4%) | 20 (20.0%) | |
| 35+ | 179 (18.5%) | 23 (23.0%) | 110 (10.7%) | 14 (14.0%) | |
|
| p = 0.50 | p = 0.26 | <0.01 | ||
| Female sex worker | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) | 699 (68.1%) | 61 (61%) | |
| Bar worker | 197 (20.4%) | 23 (23.0%) | 253 (24.6%) | 31 (31%) | |
| Other facility worker | 769 (79.6%) | 77 (77.0%) | 75 (7.3%) | 8 (8.0%) | |
|
| p = 0.52 | p = 0.25 | 0.64 | ||
| ≤ 1 year | 258 (26.6%) | 22 (22.0%) | 242 (24.6%) | 23 (25.8%) | |
| 1 to 3 years | 455 (46.9%) | 51 (51.0%) | 508 (51.6%) | 43 (44.3%) | |
| > 3 years | 257 (26.5%) | 27 (27.0%) | 235 (23.8%) | 29 (29.9%) | |
|
| p = 0.10 | p = 0.51 | <0.01 | ||
| Never went to school | 100 (10.3%) | 8 (8.0%) | 85 (8.8%) | 8 (8.0%) | |
| Primary incomplete | 198 (20.4%) | 19 (19.0%) | 418 (40.7%) | 42 (42.0%) | |
| Primary complete | 550 (56.7%) | 53 (53.0%) | 151 (14.7%) | 19 (19.0%) | |
| Entered secondary (Complete/ Incomplete) | 121 (12.5%) | 20 (20.0%) | 373 (36.3%) | 31 (31.0%) | |
|
| p = 0.14 | p = 0.37 | <0.01 | ||
| Married | 204 (21.0%) | 13 (13.0%) | 83 (8.1%) | 5 (5.0%) | |
| Separated/ divorced | 452 (46.6%) | 47 (47.0%) | 656 (63.9%) | 70 (70.0%) | |
| Widowed | 31 (3.2%) | 4 (4.0%) | 59 (5.7%) | 7 (7.0%) | |
| Single | 283 (29.2%) | 36 (36.0%) | 229 (22.3%) | 18 (18.0%) | |
|
| p = 0.88 | p = 0.35 | 0.74 | ||
| Christian | 736 (76.6%) | 76 (76%) | 760 (74.0%) | 78 (78.0%) | |
| Muslim | 225 (23.4%) | 24 (24%) | 265 (25.8%) | 22 (22.0%) | |
|
| p = 0.40 | p = 0.75 | <0.01 | ||
| 0 – 4 | 394 (40.6%) | 36 (36.0%) | 47 (4.6%) | 3 (3.0%) | |
| 5 – 9 | 210 (21.7%) | 17 (21.7%) | 82 (8.0%) | 9 (9.0%) | |
| 10 – 19 | 100 (10.3%) | 11 (11.0%) | 75 (7.3%) | 10 (10.0%) | |
| 20 – 49 | 43 (4.4%) | 6 (6.0%) | 80 (7.8%) | 8 (8.0%) | |
| 50+ | 26 (2.7%) | 4 (4.0%) | 63 (6.1%) | 4 (4.0%) | |
| Don’t remember | 193 (19.9%) | 26 (26.0%) | 680 (66.3%) | 66 (66.0%) | |
|
| p = 0.12 | p = 0.23 | <0.01 | ||
| 14 or younger | 123 (12.7%) | 9 (9.0%) | 355 (34.6%) | 40 (40.0%) | |
| 15-16 | 314 (32.4%) | 33 (33.0%) | 378 (36.8%) | 28 (28.0%) | |
| 17-18 | 314 (32.4%) | 36 (36.0%) | 209 (20.4%) | 20 (20%) | |
| 19 or older | 141 (14.5%) | 9 (9.0%) | 50 (4.9%) | 8 (8.0%) | |
| Unknown | 78 (8.0%) | 13 (13.0%) | 35 (3.4%) | 4 (4.0%) | |
|
| p = 0.01 | p = 0.45 | 0.02 | ||
| Consistent | 503 (55.3%) | 64 (67.4%) | 846 (84.4%) | 81 (81.8%) | |
| Inconsistent | 406 (44.7%) | 31 (32.6%) | 156 (15.6%) | 18 (18.2%) | |
|
| p = 0.07 | p = 0.33 | <0.01 | ||
| No | 601 (62.2%) | 50 (54.0%) | 42 (4.2%) | 6 (6.1%) | |
| Yes | 365 (37.8) | 46 (46.0%) | 960 (95.8%) | 93 (93.9%) | |
|
| N/A | p = 0.02 | <0.01 | ||
| Negative | 970 (100%) | 100 (100%) | 645 (62.8%) | 52 (52.0%) | |
| Positive | 0 (0%)c | 0 (0%) | 382 (37.2%) | 48 (48.0%) |
Legend: a = p-values comparing women participating in Diary Study with those in the main cohort who did not participate in the Diary Study, within each site by chi square; b = p-values comparing the Diary participants between the two sites by chi square; c = Consistent condom use defined as reported condom use in the past three month was Always/Most of the time; d = Eligibility for the Tanzanian cohort was based on HIV seronegativity.
Summary of cleansing data reported in the diaries over 42 days by women who had complete data in the Diary Study in Tanzania and Uganda, per woman analysis.
| Tanzanian Diaries(N = 82) | Ugandan Diaries(N = 99) | Comparison(p-value)a | |
|
| |||
| Number of women who report cleansing ever | 79 (96.3%) | 99 (100.0%) | p = 0.06 |
| Mean cleansing acts per dayb | 3.7 | 4.5 | |
| Median (IQR) cleansing acts per dayb | 4.0 (3.2 to 4.6) | 4.7 (4.2 to 5.0) | p<0.01 |
| Mean frequency of cleansing per dayb | (n = 82) | (n = 99) | p<0.01 |
| <0.50 | 3 (3.7%) | 0 (0%) | |
| 0.50 to 1.49 | 3 (3.7%) | 0 (0%) | |
| 1.50 to 2.49 | 6 (7.3%) | 0 (0%) | |
| 2.50 to 3.49 | 13 (15.9%) | 5 (5.1%) | |
| 3.50 to 4.49 | 32 (39.0%) | 34 (34.3%) | |
| >4.50 | 25 (30.5%) | 60 (60.6%) | |
|
| (n = 82) | (n = 99) | |
| Overall substance use | p<0.01 | ||
| Water only always | 28 (34.2%) | 19 (19.2%) | |
| Commercial product at least once, but never traditionalc | 46 (56.1%) | 44 (44.4%) | |
| Traditional product at least once, but never commerciald | 3 (3.7%) | 4 (4.0%) | |
| Both commercial and traditional products at least once, separately | 1 (1.2%) | 18 (18.2%) | |
| Both commercial and traditional products at least once, combined | 1 (1.2%) | 14 (14.1%) | |
| Does not cleanse | 3 (3.7%) | 0 (0%) | |
| Frequency of using a commercial product as proportion of times cleansede | (n = 48) | (n = 76) | p = 0.38 |
| <25% | 12 (25%) | 24 (31.6%) | |
| 25 to 49% | 4 (8.3%) | 4 (5.3%) | |
| 50 to 74% | 6 (12.5%) | 11 (14.5%) | |
| 75% + | 26 (54.2%) | 37 (48.7%) | |
| Frequency of using a traditional product as proportion of times cleansedf | (n = 5) | (n = 36) | p = 0.12 |
| <25% | 5 (100%) | 33 (91.7%) | |
| 25 to 49% | 0 (0%) | 3 (8.3%) | |
| 50 to 74% | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) | |
| 75% + | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) | |
|
| (n = 82) | (n = 99) | |
| Application method | p<0.01 | ||
| Fingers only always | 46 (56.1%) | 36 (36.4%) | |
| Cloth at least once, but never other | 20 (24.4%) | 19 (19.2%) | |
| Otherg at least once, but never cloth | 6 (7.3%) | 14 (14.1%) | |
| Both cloth and other at least once, separately | 2 (2.4%) | 21 (21.2%) | |
| Both cloth and other at least once, combined | 5 (6.1%) | 9 (9.1%) | |
| Does not cleanse | 3 (3.7%) | 0 (0%) | |
| Frequency of using cloth, as proportion of times cleansed | (n = 27) | (n = 49) | p = 0.45 |
| <25% | 17 (63.0%) | 32 (65.3%) | |
| 25 to 49% | 0 (0%) | 5 (10.2%) | |
| 50 to 74% | 4 (14.8%) | 3 (6.1%) | |
| 75% + | 6 (22.2%) | 9 (18.4%) | |
| Frequency of using another applicator, as proportion of times cleansed | (n = 13) | (n = 44) | p = 1.00 |
| <25% | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) | |
| 25 to 49% | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) | |
| 50 to 74% | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) | |
| 75% + | 13 (100%) | 44 (100%) | |
|
| |||
| Number of women who had sex at least once during the study | 69 (84.2%) | 96 (97.0%) | p<0.01 |
| Mean number of sex acts per dayh | 0.43 | 1.67 | |
| Median (IQR) of sex acts per dayh | 0.29 (0.19 to 0.60) | 1.37 (0.91 to 2.41) | p<0.01 |
| Frequency of sex-related cleansing, as a proportion of the woman’s total sex actsi | (n = 57) | (n = 71) | p<0.01 |
| Never | 3 (5.3%) | 3 (4.2%) | |
| <25% | 1 (1.8%) | 2 (2.8%) | |
| 25 to 49% | 3 (5.3%) | 9 (12.7%) | |
| 50 to 74% | 8 (14.0%) | 27 (38.0%) | |
| 75% + | 42 (73.7%) | 30 (42.3%) | |
| Mean cleansing acts per day when NO sex was reported | 3.78 | 4.46 | |
| Mean cleansing acts per day when sex was reported | 3.99 | 4.56 | |
| p-values for the difference between distributionsj | p = 0.01 | p = 0.08 | |
|
| |||
| Frequency of menstruation | p = 0.13 | ||
| 2+ menstrual periods during study | 31 (37.8%) | 51 (51.5%) | |
| One menstrual period during study | 39 (47.6%) | 33 (33.3%) | |
| No menstrual periods during study | 12 (14.6%) | 15 (15.2%) | |
| Cleansing related to menstruation | (n = 70) | (n = 84) | |
| Mean cleansing acts per day when there was NO menstruation | 3.68 | 4.50 | |
| Mean cleansing act per day when there was menstruation | 3.98 | 4.67 | |
| p-values for the difference between distributionsj | p<0.01 | p<0.01 | |
| Sex during menstruation | (N = 70) | (N = 84) | |
| Participants who reported sex at least once during a day of menstruation | 8 (11.4%) | 34 (40.5%) | p = 0.01 |
|
| |||
| Frequency | |||
| Participants who noted vaginal discomfort at least once | 40 (48.8%) | 60 (60.6%) | 0.13 |
| Cleansing related to vaginal discomfort | (n = 40) | (n = 60) | |
| Mean cleansing acts per day when there was NO vaginal discomfort | 3.69 | 4.54 | |
| Mean cleansing acts per day when there was vaginal discomfort | 3.89 | 4.62 | |
| p-values for the difference between distributionsj | p = 0.39 | p = 0.08 |
Legend: a = Wilcoxon rank-sum for non-parametric data; b = Calculation was for all participants including those not reporting cleansing. Up to four cleansing acts could be counted. If a participant ticked the box stating she had cleansed more than four times on that day, we assumed that she had cleansed five times; c = Commercial products for cleansing: In In-depth Interviews (IDI), participants reported the use of soap in Tanzania and soap and aerated drinks in Uganda; d = Traditional products for cleansing: In the IDI, Tanzanian participants did not report the use of traditional products, but in Uganda the use of herbs was reported; e = Restricted to those who reported using a commercial substance; f = Restricted to those who reported using a traditional substance; g = Other applicator used for cleansing: In IDI, participants reported the use of toilet paper in Tanzania and Uganda; h = Restricted to those who reported having sex; i = Among women who reported cleansing at least once and had sex at least once, restricted to the days when they reported cleansing ≤4 times so that all sex-related cleansing could be captured by the diary; j = Wilcoxon signed-rank test for paired data; k = Vaginal discomfort was defined as vaginal irritation, pain or itching; an abnormal discharge; or abnormal smell.
Summary of insertion data reported in the diaries over 42 days by woman who had complete data in the Diary Study in Tanzania and Uganda, per woman analysis.
| Tanzanian Diaries(N = 82) | Ugandan Diaries(N = 99) | Comparison(p-value)a | |
|
| |||
| Number of women who report insertion ever | 8 (9.8%) | 45 (45.5%) | p<0.01 |
| Mean insertion acts during the six weeks of the studyb | 20.6 | 40.8 | |
| Median (IQR) insertion acts in the studyb | 4.5 (2.0 to 29.0) | 19.0 (9.0 to 67.0) | p = 0.04 |
| Frequency of insertion acts in the studyb | p = 0.03 | ||
| 1 to 5 times | 5 (62.5%) | 7 (15.6%) | |
| 6 to 10 times | 1 (12.5%) | 7 (15.6%) | |
| 11 to 20 times | 0 (0.0%) | 10 (22.2%) | |
| > 20 times | 2 (25.0%) | 21 (46.7%) | |
|
| |||
| Overall substance use | (n = 8) | (n = 45) | p = 0.71 |
| Commercial product only alwaysc | 1 (12.5%) | 9 (20.0%) | |
| Traditional product only alwaysd | 4 (50.0%) | 7 (15.6%) | |
| Both commercial and traditional products at least once, separately | 1 (12.5%) | 23 (51.1%) | |
| Both commercial and traditional products at least once, combined | 2 (25.0%) | 6 (13.3%) | |
|
| |||
| Application method | (n = 8) | (n = 45) | p = 0.98 |
| Fingers only always | 3 (37.5%) | 16 (35.6%) | |
| Cloth at least once but never other | 2 (25.0%) | 7 (15.6%) | |
| Othere at least once but never cloth | 1 (12.5%) | 12 (26.7%) | |
| Both cloth & Other at least once, separately | 0 | 9 (20.0%) | |
| Both cloth and Other at least once, combined | 2 (25.0%) | 1 (2.2%) | |
|
| |||
| Frequency of sex-related insertion, as a proportion of the woman’s total sex acts f | (n = 6) | (n = 43) | p = 0.02 |
| Never | 3 (50.0%) | 11 (25.6%) | |
| <25% | 3 (50.0%) | 23 (53.5%) | |
| 25 to 49% | 0 | 7 (16.3%) | |
| 50 to 74% | 0 | 2 (4.7%) | |
| 75% + | 0 | 0 | |
| (n = 8) | (n = 45) | ||
| Mean insertion acts per day when NO sex was reported | 0.27 | 0.38 | |
| Mean insertion acts per day when sex was reported | 0.21 | 0.91 | |
| p-values for the difference between distributionsg | p = 0.69 | p<0.01 |
Legend: a = Wilcoxon rank-sum for non-parametric data; b = This was restricted to those who reported insertion; c = Commercial products for insertion: In In-depth Interviews (IDI), no participant reported the use of a commercial product in Tanzania, and in Ugandan commercial products reported were soda (e.g. Coca-Cola), medication for vaginal infections, laundry detergent, petroleum-based jelly, and beer; d = Traditional products for insertion: In IDI, participants reported the use of herbs, ghee, snuff, and lemons in Tanzania, and herbs and honey in Uganda; e = Other applicator used for insertion: In IDI, participants reported the use of toilet paper and applicator (e.g. to insert medication) in Tanzania, and toilet paper in Uganda; f = Among women who reported insertion at least once and had sex at least once, restricted to the days when they reported inserting ≤2 times so that all sex-related insertion could be captured by the diary; g = Wilcoxon signed-rank test for paired data.
Summary of cleansing and insertion data reported in the diaries over 42 days by act.
| Tanzanian Diaries(N = 82) | Ugandan Diaries(N = 99) | Comparison(p-value)a | |
|
| |||
|
| |||
| Total number of cleansing acts in the study | 11,649 | 16,145 | |
| Overall substance by total number of acts | p = <0.01 | ||
| Water only | 7,272 (62.4%) | 8,441 (52.3%) | |
| Commercialb and water | 4,325 (37.1%) | 6,980 (43.2%) | |
| Traditionalc and water | 18 (0.2%) | 423 (2.6%) | |
| Commercial only | 3 (0.0%) | 146 (0.9%) | |
| Traditional only | 0 (0.0%) | 16 (0.1%) | |
| Commercial, traditional and water | 3 (0.0%) | 40 (0.3%) | |
| Commercial and traditional | 0 (0.0%) | 2 (0.0%) | |
| Missingd | 28 (0.2%) | 97 (0.6%) | |
|
| |||
| Overall method by total number of acts | <0.01 | ||
| Fingers only | 10,218 (87.7%) | 13,415 (83.8%) | |
| Cloth only | 471 (4.0%) | 412 (2.6%) | |
| Other onlye | 2 (0.0%) | 48 (0.3%) | |
| Cloth and finger | 902 (7.7%) | 1,919 (12.0%) | |
| Other and finger | 33 (0.3%) | 202 (1.3%) | |
| Cloth, other and finger | 7 (0.1%) | 6 (0.0%) | |
| Cloth, other | 16 (0.2%) | 16 (0.1%) | |
| Missingd | 0 (0%) | 128 (0.8%) | |
|
| |||
| Total sex-related cleansing acts, as proportion of all cleansing | 1743 (15.0%) | 6665 (41.3%) | |
| Of the total sex-related cleansing acts, how many were before sex | 782 (44.9%) | 3506 (52.6%) | |
| Of the total cleansing acts before sex, how many used a condom | 370 (47.3%) | 2,841 (81.0%) | <0.01 |
| Of the total sex-related cleansing acts, how many were after sex | 961 (55.1%) | 3159 (47.4%) | |
| Of the total cleansing acts after sex, how many used a condom | 208 (21.6%) | 710 (22.5%) | 0.59 |
| Total number of sex acts during the study | 1254 | 6749 | |
| Total number of sex acts on days when cleansed ≤4 times | 864 | 2137 | |
| Of the total sex acts, how many were associated with before sex cleansing | 527 (70.0%) | 1033 (48.3%) | |
| Of the total sex acts, how many were associated with after sex cleansing | 646 (74.8%) | 1077 (50.4%) | |
|
| |||
|
| |||
| Total number of insertion acts in the study | 155 | 1,444 | |
| Overall substance by total number of acts | <0.01 | ||
| Commercial product onlyf | 3 (1.9%) | 756 (52.4%) | |
| Traditional product onlyg | 148 (95.5%) | 680 (47.1%) | |
| Commercial and traditional product together | 4 (2.6%) | 8 (1.0%) | |
|
| |||
| Overall method by total number of acts | <0.01 | ||
| Finger only | 144 (87.8%) | 1,071 (74.7%) | |
| Cloth only | 0 (0.0%) | 66 (4.6%) | |
| Other onlyh | 0 (0.0%) | 99 (6.9%) | |
| Cloth and finger | 6 (3.9%) | 156 (10.9%) | |
| Other and finger | 1 (0.7%) | 40 (2.8%) | |
| Cloth and other | 0 (0.0%) | 1 (0.1%) | |
| Cloth, finger and other | 4 (2.6%) | 0 (0.0%) | |
| Missingd | 0 (0%) | 11 (0.8%) | |
|
| |||
| Total sex-related insertion acts, as proportion of all insertion | 7 (4.5%) | 978 (67.7%) | <0.01 |
| Of the total sex-related insertion acts, how many were before sex | 6 (85.7%) | 590 (60.3%) | <0.01 |
| Of the total insertion acts before sex, how many used a condom | 3 (50.0%) | 461 (78.1%) | 0.03 |
| Of the total sex-related insertion acts, how many were after sex | 1 (14.3%) | 388 (39.7%) | <0.01 |
| Of the total insertion acts after sex, how many used a condom | 0 (0%) | 80 (20.6%) | 0.61 |
Legend: a = Wilcoxon rank-sum for non-parametric data;; b = Commercial products for cleansing: In In-depth Interviews (IDI), participants reported the use of soap in Tanzania, and soap, soda (e.g. Coca-Cola), salt, and laundry detergent in Uganda; c = Traditional products for cleansing: In the IDI, Tanzanian participants did not report the use of traditional products, but in Uganda the use of herbs was reported; d = data was missing for substance or applicator, but cleansing or insertion was ticked; e = Other applicator used for cleansing: In IDI, participants reported the use of toilet paper in both Tanzania and Uganda; f = Commercial products for insertion: In In-depth Interviews (IDI), no participants reported the use of a commercial product in Tanzania, and in Uganda, participants reported the use of soda (e.g. Coca-Cola), medication for vaginal infections, laundry detergent, petroleum-based jelly, and beer; g = Traditional products for insertion: In IDI, participants reported the use of herbs, ghee, snuff and lemon in Tanzania, and herbs and honey in Uganda; h = Other applicator used for insertion: In IDI, participants reported the use of toilet paper in Tanzania, applicator (e.g. to insert medication), and toilet paper in Uganda.