Suchergebnisse

AbstractIntroductionStigma 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.MethodsA 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.ResultsThe 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.ConclusionsOur 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.

AbstractIntroductionFemale and male sex workers experience heightened vulnerability to HIV and other health harms that are compounded by substance use, physical and sexual violence, and limited access to health services. In Kisumu, Kenya, where sex work is widespread and substance use is a growing public health concern, offering pre‐exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) for HIV prevention could help curtail the HIV epidemic. Our study examines "syndemics," or mutually reinforcing epidemics of substance use, violence and HIV, in relation to PrEP acceptability and feasibility among female and male sex workers in Kenya, one of the first African countries to approve PrEP for HIV prevention.MethodsFrom 2016 to 2017, sex workers in Kisumu reporting recent alcohol or drug use and experiences of violence participated in qualitative interviews on HIV risk and perspectives on health service needs, including PrEP programming. Content analysis identified themes relating to PrEP knowledge, acceptability, access challenges and delivery preferences.ResultsAmong 45 female and 28 male sex workers, median age was 28 and 25 respectively. All participants reported past‐month alcohol use and 91% of women and 82% of men reported past‐month drug use. Violence was pervasive, with most women and men reporting past‐year physical (96% women, 86% men) and sexual (93% women, 79% men) violence. Concerning PrEP, interviews revealed: (1) low PrEP knowledge, especially among women; (2) high PrEP acceptability and perceived need, particularly within syndemic contexts of substance use and violence; and (3) preferences for accessible, non‐stigmatizing PrEP delivery initiatives designed with input from sex workers.ConclusionsThrough a syndemic lens, substance use and violence interact to increase HIV vulnerability and perceived need for PrEP among female and male sex workers in Kisumu. Although interest in PrEP was high, most sex workers in our sample, particularly women, were not benefiting from it. Syndemic substance use and violence experienced by sex workers posed important barriers to PrEP access for sex workers. Increasing PrEP access for sex workers will require addressing substance use and violence through integrated programming.

AbstractIntroductionOral pre‐exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) has the potential to reduce HIV acquisition among adolescent girls and young women (AGYW) in sub‐Saharan Africa, a priority population for epidemic control. However, intimate partner violence (IPV) and low relationship power can create significant challenges to PrEP use. The Tu'Washindi intervention aimed to increase PrEP use by addressing relationship‐ and violence‐related barriers among AGYW enrolled in the DREAMS Initiative in Siaya County, Kenya.MethodsOur multi‐level, community‐based intervention was piloted in a cluster‐randomized controlled trial conducted at six DREAMS sites from April to December 2019 (NCT03938818). Three intervention components were delivered over 6 months: an eight‐session empowerment‐based support club, community sensitization targeted towards male partners and a couples' PrEP education event. Participants were ages 17–24, HIV negative and either eligible for, or already taking, PrEP. Over 6 months of follow‐up, we assessed IPV (months 3 and 6) and PrEP uptake and continuation (month 6) through interviewer‐administered questionnaires; PrEP adherence was assessed with Wisepill electronic monitoring devices. These outcomes were compared using adjusted Poisson and negative binomial regression models.ResultsWe enrolled 103 AGYW with median age of 22 years (IQR 20–23); one‐third were currently taking PrEP and 45% reported IPV in the past 3 months. Retention was 97% at month 6. Compared to the control arm, intervention arm participants were more likely to initiate PrEP, if not already using it at enrolment (52% vs. 24%, aRR 2.28, 95% CI 1.19–4.38, p = 0.01), and those taking PrEP had more days with device openings (25% of days vs. 13%, aRR 1.94, 95% CI 1.16–3.25, p = 0.01). Twenty percent of participants reported IPV during follow‐up. There were trends towards fewer IPV events (aIRR 0.66, 95% CI 0.27–1.62, p = 0.37) and fewer events resulting in injury (aIRR 0.21, 95% CI 0.04–1.02, p = 0.05) in the intervention versus control arm.ConclusionsTu'Washindi shows promise in promoting PrEP uptake and adherence among AGYW without concomitant increases in IPV; however, adherence was still suboptimal. Further research is needed to determine whether these gains translate to increases in the proportion of AGYW with protective levels of PrEP adherence and to evaluate the potential for the intervention to reduce IPV risk.