Haneefa T Saleem1, Joseph G Rosen2, Caitlin Quinn2, Avani Duggaraju2, Caitlin E Kennedy2. 1. Department of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, United States. Electronic address: haneefa.saleem@jhu.edu. 2. Department of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, United States.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Attention to the contraception values and preferences of those living with HIV is essential to meeting their reproductive rights and health needs. We systematically reviewed the literature on contraception values and preferences among women and men living with HIV. STUDY DESIGN: We searched ten electronic databases for articles from 1 January 2005 through 27 July 2020 for qualitative and quantitative studies of the values and preferences for contraceptive methods among individuals living with HIV. RESULTS: Twenty-one studies, primarily from sub-Saharan Africa, met the inclusion criteria. Contraception values and preferences were shaped by several factors: availability, accessibility, and convenience; perceived effectiveness; safety and tolerability; dual protection; fertility desires; partnership dynamics; and provider recommendations. Male condoms were a frequently preferred contraceptive method, offering an affordable and accessible form of dual protection against HIV and unwanted pregnancy. Fears of infertility and side effects decreased interest in hormonal contraceptive methods. Financial burdens incurred by HIV management and a desire to reduce dual reproductive health and HIV care burdens influenced preferences. Healthcare providers contributed to contraceptive preferences of women living with HIV, informing perceptions of safety, tolerability, and effectiveness. CONCLUSION: Contraception values and preferences among women living with HIV are complex and influenced by factors related and unrelated to their HIV status. Considering contraception values and preferences of people living with HIV will ensure that their autonomy and right to make decisions about the contraceptive methods best for them are upheld.
OBJECTIVE: Attention to the contraception values and preferences of those living with HIV is essential to meeting their reproductive rights and health needs. We systematically reviewed the literature on contraception values and preferences among women and men living with HIV. STUDY DESIGN: We searched ten electronic databases for articles from 1 January 2005 through 27 July 2020 for qualitative and quantitative studies of the values and preferences for contraceptive methods among individuals living with HIV. RESULTS: Twenty-one studies, primarily from sub-Saharan Africa, met the inclusion criteria. Contraception values and preferences were shaped by several factors: availability, accessibility, and convenience; perceived effectiveness; safety and tolerability; dual protection; fertility desires; partnership dynamics; and provider recommendations. Male condoms were a frequently preferred contraceptive method, offering an affordable and accessible form of dual protection against HIV and unwanted pregnancy. Fears of infertility and side effects decreased interest in hormonal contraceptive methods. Financial burdens incurred by HIV management and a desire to reduce dual reproductive health and HIV care burdens influenced preferences. Healthcare providers contributed to contraceptive preferences of women living with HIV, informing perceptions of safety, tolerability, and effectiveness. CONCLUSION: Contraception values and preferences among women living with HIV are complex and influenced by factors related and unrelated to their HIV status. Considering contraception values and preferences of people living with HIV will ensure that their autonomy and right to make decisions about the contraceptive methods best for them are upheld.
Authors: Michele S O'Shea; Nora E Rosenberg; Mina C Hosseinipour; Gretchen S Stuart; William C Miller; Stephen M Kaliti; Mwawi Mwale; Phylos P Bonongwe; Jennifer H Tang Journal: AIDS Care Date: 2014-11-04
Authors: Catherine S Todd; Mark A Stibich; Fatima Laher; Monica S Malta; Francisco I Bastos; Kennedy Imbuki; Douglas N Shaffer; Samuel K Sinei; Glenda E Gray Journal: AIDS Behav Date: 2011-02
Authors: A Reitter; A U Stücker; R Linde; C Königs; G Knecht; E Herrmann; R Schlößer; F Louwen; A Haberl Journal: HIV Med Date: 2014-03-06 Impact factor: 3.180
Authors: Juan M Leyva-Moral; Patrick A Palmieri; María Feijoo-Cid; Sandra K Cesario; Nataly Julissa Membrillo-Pillpe; Patricia N Piscoya-Angeles; Marilyn Goff; Ana Toledo-Chavarri; Joan E Edwards Journal: Int J Nurs Stud Date: 2017-10-25 Impact factor: 5.837
Authors: Lisa B Haddad; Caryl Feldacker; Denise J Jamieson; Hannock Tweya; Carrie Cwiak; Amy G Bryant; Mina C Hosseinipour; Thomas Chaweza; Linly Mlundira; Fanny Kachale; Gretchen S Stuart; Irving Hoffman; Sam Phiri Journal: Int J Gynaecol Obstet Date: 2014-05-13 Impact factor: 3.561
Authors: Elizabeth K Harrington; Shari Dworkin; Mellissa Withers; Maricianah Onono; Zachary Kwena; Sara J Newmann Journal: Cult Health Sex Date: 2015-10-26
Authors: Susannah H Mayhew; Manuela Colombini; James Kelly Kimani; Keith Tomlin; Charlotte E Warren; Richard Mutemwa Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2017-07-05 Impact factor: 3.295