J Danielle Sharpe1,2, Zhi Zhou2, César G Escobar-Viera3, Jamie P Morano4,5, Robert J Lucero6,7, Gladys E Ibañez8, Mark Hart2, Christa L Cook6, Robert L Cook2. 1. a Department of Epidemiology , Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University , Atlanta , Georgia , USA. 2. b Department of Epidemiology , College of Public Health and Health Professions, College of Medicine, University of Florida , Gainesville , Florida , USA. 3. c Center for Research on Media , Technology, and Health, Health Policy Institute, University of Pittsburgh , Pittsburgh , Pennsylvania , USA. 4. d Division of Infectious Disease and International Medicine , Morsani College of Medicine, University of South Florida , Tampa , Florida , USA. 5. e Florida Department of Health-Hillsborough , Tampa , Florida , USA. 6. f Department of Family , Community, and Health System Science, College of Nursing, University of Florida , Gainesville , Florida , USA. 7. g VA HSR&D Center of Innovation on Disability and Rehabilitation Research , Gainesville , Florida , USA. 8. h Department of Epidemiology , Robert Stempel College of Public Health and Social Work, Florida International University , Miami , Florida , USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Alcohol consumption at hazardous levels is more prevalent and associated with poor health outcomes among persons living with the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV; PLWH). Although PLWH are receptive to using technology to manage health issues, it is unknown whether a cell phone app to self-manage alcohol use would be acceptable among PLWH who drink. The objectives of this study were to determine factors associated with interest in an app to self-manage drinking and to identify differences in baseline mobile technology use among PLWH by drinking level. METHODS: The study population included 757 PLWH recruited from 2014 to 2016 into the Florida Cohort, an ongoing cohort study investigating the utilization of health services and HIV care outcomes among PLWH. Participants completed a questionnaire examining demographics, substance use, mobile technology use, and other health behaviors. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify factors significantly associated with interest in an app to self-manage drinking. We also determined whether mobile technology use varied by drinking level. RESULTS: Of the sample, 40% of persons who drink at hazardous levels, 34% of persons who drink at nonhazardous levels, and 19% of persons who do not drink were interested in a self-management app for alcohol use. Multivariable logistic regression analysis indicated that nonhazardous drinking (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 1.78; confidence interval [CI 95%]: 1.10-2.88) and hazardous drinking (AOR = 2.58; CI: 1.60-4.16) were associated with interest, controlling for age, gender, education, and drug use. Regarding mobile technology use, most of the sample reported smartphone ownership (56%), text messaging (89%), and at least one cell phone app (69%). CONCLUSIONS: Regardless of drinking level, overall mobile technology use among PLWH was moderate, whereas PLWH who consumed alcohol expressed greater interest in a cell phone app to self-manage alcohol use. This indicates that many PLWH who drink would be interested in and prepared for a mobile technology-based intervention to reduce alcohol consumption.
BACKGROUND:Alcohol consumption at hazardous levels is more prevalent and associated with poor health outcomes among persons living with the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV; PLWH). Although PLWH are receptive to using technology to manage health issues, it is unknown whether a cell phone app to self-manage alcohol use would be acceptable among PLWH who drink. The objectives of this study were to determine factors associated with interest in an app to self-manage drinking and to identify differences in baseline mobile technology use among PLWH by drinking level. METHODS: The study population included 757 PLWH recruited from 2014 to 2016 into the Florida Cohort, an ongoing cohort study investigating the utilization of health services and HIV care outcomes among PLWH. Participants completed a questionnaire examining demographics, substance use, mobile technology use, and other health behaviors. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify factors significantly associated with interest in an app to self-manage drinking. We also determined whether mobile technology use varied by drinking level. RESULTS: Of the sample, 40% of persons who drink at hazardous levels, 34% of persons who drink at nonhazardous levels, and 19% of persons who do not drink were interested in a self-management app for alcohol use. Multivariable logistic regression analysis indicated that nonhazardous drinking (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 1.78; confidence interval [CI 95%]: 1.10-2.88) and hazardous drinking (AOR = 2.58; CI: 1.60-4.16) were associated with interest, controlling for age, gender, education, and drug use. Regarding mobile technology use, most of the sample reported smartphone ownership (56%), text messaging (89%), and at least one cell phone app (69%). CONCLUSIONS: Regardless of drinking level, overall mobile technology use among PLWH was moderate, whereas PLWH who consumed alcohol expressed greater interest in a cell phone app to self-manage alcohol use. This indicates that many PLWH who drink would be interested in and prepared for a mobile technology-based intervention to reduce alcohol consumption.
Entities:
Keywords:
Alcohol; HIV; cell phone; drinking; mHealth; mobile apps; mobile technology; self-management
Authors: Robyn C Neblett; Heidi E Hutton; Bryan Lau; Mary E McCaul; Richard D Moore; Geetanjali Chander Journal: J Womens Health (Larchmt) Date: 2011-01-31 Impact factor: 2.681
Authors: Robert L Cook; Diane M Comer; Harold C Wiesenfeld; Chung-Chou H Chang; Ralph Tarter; Judith R Lave; Duncan B Clark Journal: Sex Transm Dis Date: 2006-09 Impact factor: 2.830
Authors: Amy S Baranoski; Elizabeth Meuser; Helene Hardy; Elizabeth F Closson; Matthew J Mimiaga; Steven A Safren; Pushwaz Virk; Rowena Luk; Paul R Skolnik; Vikram S Kumar Journal: AIDS Care Date: 2013-06-06
Authors: Keith J Horvath; Gene P Danilenko; Mark L Williams; Jane Simoni; K Rivet Amico; J Michael Oakes; B R Simon Rosser Journal: AIDS Behav Date: 2012-05
Authors: Panagiotis Vagenas; Marwan M Azar; Michael M Copenhaver; Sandra A Springer; Patricia E Molina; Frederick L Altice Journal: Curr HIV/AIDS Rep Date: 2015-12 Impact factor: 5.071
Authors: Yunan Xu; Xinguang Chen; Akemi Wijayabahu; Zhi Zhou; Bin Yu; Emma C Spencer; Robert L Cook Journal: Curr HIV Res Date: 2020 Impact factor: 1.581
Authors: Suzette Glasner; Helene Chokron Garneau; Alfonso Ang; Lara Ray; Alexandra Venegas; Richard Rawson; Seth Kalichman Journal: PLoS One Date: 2020-03-12 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Taghrid Asfar; Maria Luisa Alcaide; Deborah L Jones; Laura A McClure; Judson Brewer; David J Lee; Adam Carrico Journal: PLoS One Date: 2022-08-25 Impact factor: 3.752
Authors: Sarah M Jabour; Alexis Page; Seventy F Hall; Lycinda Rodriguez; Wendy C Shields; Anika Ah Alvanzo Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2018-08-14 Impact factor: 5.428