Jerome T Galea1, Janni J Kinsler, John Imrie, César R Nureña, Lucía Ruiz, Luis Fernando Galarza, Jorge Sánchez, William E Cunningham. 1. Jerome T. Galea is with the Program in Global Health; Janni J. Kinsler is with the Department of Community Health Sciences, School of Public Health; and William E. Cunningham is with the Department of Medicine, Division of General Internal Medicine and Health Services Research, School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles. John Imrie is with the Centre for Sexual Health and HIV Research, Faculty of Population Health, University College London, London, UK. César R. Nureña is with the Escuela de Antropología, Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos, and Jorge Sánchez is with the Asociación Civil Impacta Salud y Educación, Lima, Peru. Lucía Ruiz is with the Asociación Civil Selva Amazónica, Iquitos, Peru. Luis Fernando Galarza is with the Fundación Ecuatoriana Equidad, Guayaquil, Ecuador.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: We examined views on rectal microbicides (RMs), a potential HIV prevention option, among men who have sex with men and transgender women in 3 South American cities. METHODS: During September 2009 to September 2010, we conducted 10 focus groups and 36 in-depth interviews (n = 140) in Lima and Iquitos, Peru, and Guayaquil, Ecuador, to examine 5 RM domains: knowledge, thoughts and opinions about RM as an HIV prevention tool, use, condoms, and social concerns. We coded emergent themes in recorded and transcribed data sets and extracted representative quotes. We collected sociodemographic information with a self-administered questionnaire. RESULTS: RM issues identified included limited knowledge; concerns regarding plausibility, side effects, and efficacy; impact on condom use; target users (insertive vs receptive partners); and access concerns. CONCLUSIONS: Understanding the sociocultural issues affecting RMs is critical to their uptake and should be addressed prior to product launch.
OBJECTIVES: We examined views on rectal microbicides (RMs), a potential HIV prevention option, among men who have sex with men and transgender women in 3 South American cities. METHODS: During September 2009 to September 2010, we conducted 10 focus groups and 36 in-depth interviews (n = 140) in Lima and Iquitos, Peru, and Guayaquil, Ecuador, to examine 5 RM domains: knowledge, thoughts and opinions about RM as an HIV prevention tool, use, condoms, and social concerns. We coded emergent themes in recorded and transcribed data sets and extracted representative quotes. We collected sociodemographic information with a self-administered questionnaire. RESULTS:RM issues identified included limited knowledge; concerns regarding plausibility, side effects, and efficacy; impact on condom use; target users (insertive vs receptive partners); and access concerns. CONCLUSIONS: Understanding the sociocultural issues affecting RMs is critical to their uptake and should be addressed prior to product launch.
Authors: R H Gray; M J Wawer; R Brookmeyer; N K Sewankambo; D Serwadda; F Wabwire-Mangen; T Lutalo; X Li; T vanCott; T C Quinn Journal: Lancet Date: 2001-04-14 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: A Carballo-Diéguez; C Dolezal; J A Bauermeister; W O'Brien; A Ventuneac; K Mayer Journal: Sex Transm Infect Date: 2008-11 Impact factor: 3.519
Authors: Alex Carballo-Diéguez; Rebecca Giguere; Curtis Dolezal; Cheng-Shiun Leu; Iván C Balán; William Brown; Christine Rael; Barbra A Richardson; Jeanna M Piper; Linda-Gail Bekker; Suwat Chariyalertsak; Anupong Chitwarakorn; Pedro Gonzales; Timothy H Holtz; Albert Liu; Kenneth H Mayer; Carmen D Zorrilla; Javier R Lama; Ian McGowan; Ross D Cranston Journal: AIDS Behav Date: 2017-12
Authors: Millicent Atujuna; Peter A Newman; Melissa Wallace; Megan Eluhu; Clara Rubincam; Ben Brown; Linda-Gail Bekker Journal: PLoS One Date: 2018-02-08 Impact factor: 3.240