Decisions About Testing for HIV While in a Relationship: Perspectives From an Urban, Convenience Sample of HIV-Negative Male Couples Who Have a Sexual Agreement

A cluster randomized trial to reduce HIV risk from outside partnerships in Zambian HIV-Negative couples using a novel behavioral intervention, "Strengthening Our Vows": Study protocol and baseline data

BACKGROUND

Heterosexual couples contribute to most new HIV infections in areas of generalized HIV epidemics in sub-Saharan Africa. After Couples' Voluntary HIV Counseling and Testing (CVCT), heterosexual concordant HIV negative couples (CNC) in cohabiting unions contribute to approximately 47% of residual new infections in couples. These infections are attributed to concurrent sexual partners, a key driver of the HIV epidemic in Zambia.

METHODS/DESIGN

Ten Zambian government clinics in two of the largest cities were randomized in matched pairs to a Strengthening Our Vows (SOV) intervention or a Good Health Package (GHP) comparison arm. SOV addressed preventing HIV infection from concurrent partners and protecting spouses after exposures outside the relationship. GHP focused on handwashing; water chlorination; household deworming; and screening for hypertension, diabetes and schistosomiasis. CNC were referred from CVCT services in government clinics. Follow-up includes post-intervention questionnaires and outcome assessments through 60 months. Longitudinal outcomes of interest include self-report and laboratory markers of condomless sex with outside partners and reported sexual agreements. We present baseline characteristics and factors associated with study arm and reported risk using descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

The mean age of men was 32 and 26 for women. On average, couples cohabited for 6 years and had 2 children. Baseline analyses demonstrated some failures of randomization by study arm which will be considered in future primary analyses of longitudinal data. An HIV/STI risk factor composite was not different in the two study arms. Almost one-quarter of couples had an HIV risk factor at baseline.

DISCUSSION

In preparation for future biomedical and behavioral interventions in sub-Saharan Africa, it is critical to understand and decrease HIV risk within CNC.

Better Communication Regarding Sexual Agreements Within Serodiscordant Male Couples Leads to Improved Antiretroviral Therapy Adherence Among the HIV-Positive Partner

Sexual agreements (SAs)-guidelines that outline what type of sexual behaviors are permissible with sexual partners outside of their primary relationship-are often negotiated within same-sex male relationships to reduce their risk for HIV infection. However, HIV risk is not only a function of sexual behavior, but is also affected by factors such as antiretroviral therapy (ART) adherence. We examined whether HIV-positive partners in serodiscordant male couples who have better communication about SAs and report concordant SAs with their partners have greater odds of being adherent to ART to not only improve their health, but to also reduce the risk of transmitting HIV to partners. We analyzed longitudinal data from 135 HIV-positive partners in serodiscordant male couples recruited from Atlanta, GA, Boston, MA, and Chicago, IL to examine the relationship between optimal ART adherence and two independent variables: communication about SAs and if the couples have discrepant SAs. HIV-positive male partners who reported high levels of communication regarding SAs had nearly three times the odds of optimal adherence to ART compared to those who reported lower levels. The HIV-positive partners with discrepant SAs with their male partner had approximately half the odds of optimal adherence to ART compared to those with concordant SAs. Our findings suggest that integrating communication skills training into dyad-level HIV interventions to improve communication regarding HIV may provide more opportunities for couples to discuss ways of reducing the risk of HIV transmission. Couples may benefit from interventions that assist them in composing SAs.

Relationship Characteristics Associated with Perceptions of Partners' HIV Testing Behavior Among Male Couples

Partnered men who have sex with men are not immune to the risk of HIV. Analyzing dyadic data from 360 male couples recruited from April 2016 to June 2017, we examined how relationship characteristics might influence HIV testing behavior and perceptions of partners' HIV testing. Increasing levels of mutual trust were associated with lower odds of both partners (versus neither) having been tested in the past year (aOR = 0.91, 95% CI 0.83-0.99), but increasing levels of communal coping were associated with higher odds (aOR = 1.06, 95% CI 1.02-1.10). Only one partner was more likely to be correct about whether or not his partner had been tested in the past year (versus both) if someone had broken their sexual agreement (aOR = 2.60, 95% CI 1.17-5.76). Increasing differences in trust (aOR = 1.10, 95% CI 1.01-1.20) were also associated with higher odds of only one partner being correct. Dyadic HIV prevention efforts should incorporate skills building around negotiating sexual agreements and constructive communication.

Thematic synthesis HIV prevention qualitative studies in men who have sex with men (MSM)

Background:

Qualitative studies on HIV prevention strategies and methods among men who have sex with men (MSM) allow identify knowledge gaps and improve preventive actions.

Objective:

To make a thematic synthesis of the scientific productions that use the qualitative methodology in the strategies and methods of HIV prevention area among MSM.

Methods:

We conducted a literature review following the guidelines of the ENTREQ protocol. The analysis included 48 empirical studies published in Portuguese, English and Spanish between 2001 and 2018 available in the Medline, Embase, Scielo, Scopus, Bireme and Web of Science databases.

Results:

Where an increased production in the last six years and concentration in northern countries. Seven prevention methods were part of the study, with emphasis on pre-exposure prophylaxis, testing, condoms and behavioral strategies. The main topics discussed were stigma and support and care networks.

Conclusion:

we notice that an increasing production on prevention in the men who have sex with men segment results from the emergence of multiple preventive methods and strategies and their combined actions beyond the star role of condoms.

Sexual Agreements: A Scoping Review of Measurement, Prevalence and Links to Health Outcomes

A sexual agreement is a mutual understanding between two partners regarding sexual and relational behaviors both within and outside of their relationship. Sexual agreements have been central to research and programming efforts around HIV prevention, primarily for male couples. A comprehensive scoping review of the primary literature on sexual agreements, including negotiated safety, was performed to identify what is known about sexual agreements among couples (n = 66). Results indicate a wide range of prevalence of agreements and measurements used to characterize sexual agreements. Findings also report associations between sexual agreements and health and relational outcomes. Several knowledge gaps were identified; specifically, the need to expand sexual agreements research beyond MSM populations and the need to better understand agreement breaks, break disclosure, and how variation in agreement categorization may impact reported prevalence. This review demonstrates the importance of broadening the evidence-base of sexual agreements research and programmatic focus.

The Prevalence and Correlates of Sexual Arrangements in a National Cohort of HIV-Negative Gay and Bisexual Men in the United States

Sexual agreements have received considerable attention as an aspect of dyadic functioning associated with HIV risk. To date, this research has primarily utilized convenience samples which overrepresented men from large urban areas and with higher HIV risk. The current study utilized a national cohort of 1061 HIV-negative gay and bisexual men recruited to be geographically diverse within the U.S. The sample included 531 (50.0%) men who identified as single. Of the 530 partnered men, 240 (45.3%) were monogamous; 238 (44.9%) were in open relationships (where sex with outside partners was permitted); and 52 (9.8%) were in monogamish relationships (where sex with outside partners was limited to instances where both primary partners were present). Regardless of urban (vs. non-urban) residence, men in monogamous relationships engaged in less anal sex generally and condomless anal sex (CAS) specifically with casual partners. Single men reported significantly more frequent anal sex with casual partners compared to open and monogamish men; however, there were no significant differences among these three groups with respect to CAS with casual partners. In multivariable models, monogamish men reported significantly more frequent marijuana use and alcohol consumption compared to all other groups. Urban (vs. non-urban) residence moderated associations between sexual arrangements and depression as well as the use of illicit drugs other than marijuana. These findings point to the need to better examine the potentially unique mechanisms which confer risk and resilience for gay male couples in urban versus non-urban settings. The observed association between sexual arrangements and substance use suggests interventions which facilitate the negotiation of sexual agreements may present an opportunity to engage in dyadic substance use intervention.