Katharine Lacefield1,2, Charles Negy3, Ronald M Schrader4, Christina Kuhlman3. 1. 1 Department of Psychology, VA Maryland Healthcare System , Baltimore, Maryland. 2. 2 Department of Psychiatry, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland. 3. 3 Department of Psychology, University of Central Florida , Orlando, Florida. 4. 4 Department of Dialysis, DCI Corporate Quality Management , Albuquerque, New Mexico.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Men who have sex with men (MSM) continue to be overrepresented in rates of incidence and prevalence of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). Both HIV-diagnosed (HIV-D) and HIV-nondiagnosed (HIV-N) MSM report a variety of reasons for intentional and unintentional nonuse of condoms. Elucidating and comparing reasons for continued engagement in condomless anal sex specific to both HIV-D and HIV-N MSM likely is important to identifying effective prevention. METHODS: This study employed meta-analytic methods to evaluate and compare correlates to condomless anal sex in both HIV-D and HIV-N MSM from primary studies from 1993 to February 2013. RESULTS: Of the 19 individual correlates assessed within the subgroup of HIV-D MSM, variables that achieved significant effect were alcohol, mind-altering substance use, sexual-enhancement medication, intentional condom nonuse, self-efficacy, attitudes toward condom use, social support, gay identity, compulsivity, trading sex, and number of sex partners. Those that were statistically non-significant were intention to use a condom, perceived risk, perceived norms, perceived responsibility, HIV medical management, treatment optimism, mental health, and setting. Of the 12 correlates assessed within the subgroup of HIV-N MSM, variables that achieved significant effect were alcohol, mind-altering substance use, intentional condom nonuse, attitudes toward condom use, perceived risk, and setting. Those observed as statistically non-significant were perceived norms, social support, gay identity, mental health, trading sex, and number of sex partners. CONCLUSION: Study results have clinical implications that may guide future prevention research and practice by highlighting risk variables shared between HIV-N and HIV-D MSM, as well as variables observed to be unique to each group that may warrant more tailored intervention. Further investigation is recommended to elucidate the relationships among these variables such that optimal intervention can be determined.
PURPOSE:Men who have sex with men (MSM) continue to be overrepresented in rates of incidence and prevalence of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). Both HIV-diagnosed (HIV-D) and HIV-nondiagnosed (HIV-N) MSM report a variety of reasons for intentional and unintentional nonuse of condoms. Elucidating and comparing reasons for continued engagement in condomless anal sex specific to both HIV-D and HIV-N MSM likely is important to identifying effective prevention. METHODS: This study employed meta-analytic methods to evaluate and compare correlates to condomless anal sex in both HIV-D and HIV-N MSM from primary studies from 1993 to February 2013. RESULTS: Of the 19 individual correlates assessed within the subgroup of HIV-D MSM, variables that achieved significant effect were alcohol, mind-altering substance use, sexual-enhancement medication, intentional condom nonuse, self-efficacy, attitudes toward condom use, social support, gay identity, compulsivity, trading sex, and number of sex partners. Those that were statistically non-significant were intention to use a condom, perceived risk, perceived norms, perceived responsibility, HIV medical management, treatment optimism, mental health, and setting. Of the 12 correlates assessed within the subgroup of HIV-N MSM, variables that achieved significant effect were alcohol, mind-altering substance use, intentional condom nonuse, attitudes toward condom use, perceived risk, and setting. Those observed as statistically non-significant were perceived norms, social support, gay identity, mental health, trading sex, and number of sex partners. CONCLUSION: Study results have clinical implications that may guide future prevention research and practice by highlighting risk variables shared between HIV-N and HIV-D MSM, as well as variables observed to be unique to each group that may warrant more tailored intervention. Further investigation is recommended to elucidate the relationships among these variables such that optimal intervention can be determined.
Entities:
Keywords:
HIV; men who have sex with men (MSM); meta-analysis; risk factors.
Authors: Patrick Janulis; Brian A Feinstein; Gregory Phillips; Michael E Newcomb; Michelle Birkett; Brian Mustanski Journal: Arch Sex Behav Date: 2017-02-13
Authors: Brian Mustanski; Brian A Feinstein; Krystal Madkins; Patrick Sullivan; Gregory Swann Journal: Sex Transm Dis Date: 2017-08 Impact factor: 2.830
Authors: Demetria N Cain; Chloe Mirzayi; H Jonathon Rendina; Ana Ventuneac; Christian Grov; Jeffrey T Parsons Journal: LGBT Health Date: 2017-08-09 Impact factor: 4.151
Authors: Shea M Lemley; Jeffrey D Klausner; Sean D Young; Chrysovalantis Stafylis; Caroline Mulatya; Neal Oden; Haiyi Xie; Leslie Revoredo; Dikla Shmueli-Blumberg; Emily Hichborn; Erin McKelle; Landhing Moran; Petra Jacobs; Lisa A Marsch Journal: JMIR Res Protoc Date: 2020-10-19
Authors: R J Fredericksen; B M Whitney; E Trejo; R M Nance; E Fitzsimmons; F L Altice; A W Carrico; C M Cleland; C Del Rio; A Duerr; W M El-Sadr; S Kahana; I Kuo; K Mayer; S Mehta; L J Ouellet; V M Quan; J Rich; D W Seal; S Springer; F Taxman; W Wechsberg; H M Crane; J A C Delaney Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2021-11-04 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Ian W Holloway; Dorian E Traube; Sheree M Schrager; Diane Tan; Shannon Dunlap; Michele D Kipke Journal: PLoS One Date: 2017-09-08 Impact factor: 3.240