Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
J Int AIDS Soc ; 27(2): e26213, 2024 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38379129

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Stigma is a well-known barrier to HIV testing and treatment and is an emerging barrier to pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) use. To guide future research, measurement and interventions, we developed a conceptual framework for PrEP stigma among adolescent girls and young women (AGYW) in sub-Saharan Africa, a priority population for PrEP. METHODS: A literature review, expert consultations and focus group discussions (FGDs) were conducted to adapt the Health Stigma and Discrimination Framework, describing the stigmatization process nested within the socio-ecological framework. We reviewed all articles on PrEP stigma and on HIV, contraceptive or sexuality stigma among AGYW from 2009 to 2019. Expert consultations were conducted with 10 stigma or PrEP researchers and two Kenyan youth advisory boards to revise the framework. Finally, FGDs were conducted with AGYW PrEP users (4 FGDs; n = 20) and key influencers (14 FGDs; n = 72) in Kenya with the help of a Youth Research Team who aided in FGD conduct and results interpretation. Results from each phase were reviewed and the framework was updated to incorporate new and divergent findings. This was validated against an updated literature search from 2020 to 2023. RESULTS: The conceptual framework identifies potential drivers, facilitators and manifestations of PrEP stigma, its outcomes and health impacts, and relevant intersecting stigmas. The main findings include: (1) PrEP stigma is driven by HIV, gender and sexuality stigmas, and low PrEP community awareness. (2) Stigma is facilitated by factors at multiple levels: policy (e.g. targeting of PrEP to high-risk populations), health systems (e.g. youth-friendly service availability), community (e.g. social capital) and individual (e.g. empowerment). (3) Similar to other stigmas, manifestations include labelling, violence and shame. (4) PrEP stigma results in decreased access to and acceptability of PrEP, limited social support and community resistance, which can impact mental health and decrease PrEP uptake and adherence. (5) Stigma may engender resilience by motivating AGYW to think of PrEP as an exercise in personal agency. CONCLUSIONS: Our PrEP stigma conceptual framework highlights potential intervention targets at multiple levels in the stigmatization process. Its adoption would enable researchers to develop standardized measures and compare stigma across timepoints and populations as well as design and evaluate interventions.


Subject(s)
Anti-HIV Agents , HIV Infections , Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis , Humans , Adolescent , Female , HIV Infections/prevention & control , HIV Infections/drug therapy , Kenya , Anti-HIV Agents/therapeutic use , Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis/methods , Sexual Behavior
2.
BMC Womens Health ; 23(1): 58, 2023 02 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36765358

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Input from end-users during preclinical phases can support market fit for new HIV prevention technologies. With several long-acting pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) implants in development, we aimed to understand young women's preferences for PrEP implants to inform optimal design. METHODS: We developed a discrete choice experiment and surveyed 800 young women in Harare, Zimbabwe and Tshwane, South Africa between September-November 2020. Women aged 18-30 years who were nulliparous, postpartum, or exchanged sex for money, goods or shelter in prior year were eligible; quotas were set for each subgroup. The DCE asked participants to choose between two hypothetical implants for HIV prevention in a series of nine questions. Implants were described by: size, number of rods and insertion sites, duration (6-months, 1-year, 2-years), flexibility, and biodegradability. Random-parameters logit models estimated preference weights. RESULTS: Median age was 24 years (interquartile range 21-27). By design, 36% had used contraceptive implants. Duration of protection was most important feature, with strong preference for a 2-year over 6-month implant. In Zimbabwe, the number of rods/insertion sites was second most important and half as important as duration. Nonetheless, to achieve an implant lasting 2-years, 74% were estimated to accept two rods, one in each arm. In South Africa, preference was for longer, flexible implants that required removal, although each of these attributes were one-third as important as duration. On average, biodegradability and size did not influence Zimbabwean women's choices. Contraceptive implant experience and parity did not influence relative importance of attributes. CONCLUSIONS: While duration of protection was a prominent attribute shaping women's choices for PrEP implants, other characteristics related to discreetness were relevant. Optimizing for longest dosing while also ensuring minimal detection of implant placement seemed most attractive to potential users.


Subject(s)
HIV Infections , Pregnancy , Humans , Female , Young Adult , Adult , HIV Infections/prevention & control , Zimbabwe , South Africa , Surveys and Questionnaires , Contraceptive Agents
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...