S M Kegeles1, R B Hays, T J Coates. 1. Center for AIDS Prevention Studies, University of California, San Francisco 94105, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Since young gay men are engaging in alarmingly high rates of unsafe sex and few seek help for changing risky behaviors, community-level programs to prevent infection with the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) among them are urgently needed. METHODS: We developed and implemented a community-level HIV prevention program in a midsized Oregon community. The peer-led program had three components: out-reach, small groups, and a publicity campaign. Independently from the prevention program, a cohort of young gay men (n = 300) was surveyed in this and in a similar comparison community pre- and postintervention. RESULTS: Following intervention, the proportion of men engaging in any unprotected anal intercourse decreased from 41.0% to 30.0% (-27% from baseline), decreased from 20.2% to 11.1% (-45% from baseline) with nonprimary partners, and decreased from 58.9% to 44.7% (-24% from baseline) with boyfriends. No significant changes occurred in the comparison community over the same period. CONCLUSIONS: This prevention approach effectively led to HIV risk reduction. To reach risk-taking young gay men, HIV prevention activities must be embedded in social activities and community life.
OBJECTIVES: Since young gay men are engaging in alarmingly high rates of unsafe sex and few seek help for changing risky behaviors, community-level programs to prevent infection with the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) among them are urgently needed. METHODS: We developed and implemented a community-level HIV prevention program in a midsized Oregon community. The peer-led program had three components: out-reach, small groups, and a publicity campaign. Independently from the prevention program, a cohort of young gay men (n = 300) was surveyed in this and in a similar comparison community pre- and postintervention. RESULTS: Following intervention, the proportion of men engaging in any unprotected anal intercourse decreased from 41.0% to 30.0% (-27% from baseline), decreased from 20.2% to 11.1% (-45% from baseline) with nonprimary partners, and decreased from 58.9% to 44.7% (-24% from baseline) with boyfriends. No significant changes occurred in the comparison community over the same period. CONCLUSIONS: This prevention approach effectively led to HIV risk reduction. To reach risk-taking young gay men, HIV prevention activities must be embedded in social activities and community life.
Authors: J A Kelly; J S St Lawrence; T L Brasfield; A Lemke; T Amidei; R E Roffman; H V Hood; J E Smith; H Kilgore; C McNeill Journal: J Consult Clin Psychol Date: 1990-02
Authors: R A Coates; L M Calzavara; C L Soskolne; S E Read; M M Fanning; F A Shepherd; M H Klein; J K Johnson Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 1988-10 Impact factor: 4.897