在赞比亚以社区为基础减少风险

D. Jones, S. Weiss, Drenna Waldrop-Valverde, Ndashi Chitalu, Miriam Mumbi, S. Vamos
{"title":"在赞比亚以社区为基础减少风险","authors":"D. Jones, S. Weiss, Drenna Waldrop-Valverde, Ndashi Chitalu, Miriam Mumbi, S. Vamos","doi":"10.2174/1874924000801010045","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Following the trial of a sexual risk reduction intervention conducted at the University Teaching Hospital (UTH) in Lusaka, Zambia, this pilot study sought to evaluate the feasibility of conducting the intervention at the Community Health Center (CHC) level. UTH staff implemented assessments and the intervention while CHC staff provided logistic and administrative support. HIV seropositive women (CHC n = 200; UTH n = 612) attended group sessions in which male partners were randomized to a three-session or one-session group intervention arm. At baseline, consistent use of male and female condoms differed between sites (HIV+ UTH, 73%, CHC, 88%, HIV- UTH, 42%, CHC 65%); both sites in- creased combined condom use at 6 months post baseline and maintained increases over baseline at 12 months. Partici- pants did not differ between sites at baseline on condom attitudes, HIV knowledge or self efficacy. At 12 months post baseline, both sites had improved in attitudes, knowledge and efficacy and participant retention was lower at the UTH site (77% versus 82%). Inconsistent sexual barrier users increased to consistent use at both sites after 6 months (HIV positive UTH, 96%, CHC, 99%, HIV negative UTH, 84%, CHC 100%). At 12 months, HIV negative CHC participants maintained higher levels of condom use in comparison with UTH participants (F = 7.17, p = .001). Results illustrate the feasibility and efficacy of conducting group sexual risk reduction interventions in the Zambian community, and the potential for the use of group interventions in conjunction with existing CHC Voluntary Counseling and Testing (VCT) programs.","PeriodicalId":88329,"journal":{"name":"The open health services and policy journal","volume":"1 1","pages":"45-51"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2008-10-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Community-Based Risk Reduction in Zambia\",\"authors\":\"D. Jones, S. Weiss, Drenna Waldrop-Valverde, Ndashi Chitalu, Miriam Mumbi, S. Vamos\",\"doi\":\"10.2174/1874924000801010045\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Following the trial of a sexual risk reduction intervention conducted at the University Teaching Hospital (UTH) in Lusaka, Zambia, this pilot study sought to evaluate the feasibility of conducting the intervention at the Community Health Center (CHC) level. UTH staff implemented assessments and the intervention while CHC staff provided logistic and administrative support. HIV seropositive women (CHC n = 200; UTH n = 612) attended group sessions in which male partners were randomized to a three-session or one-session group intervention arm. At baseline, consistent use of male and female condoms differed between sites (HIV+ UTH, 73%, CHC, 88%, HIV- UTH, 42%, CHC 65%); both sites in- creased combined condom use at 6 months post baseline and maintained increases over baseline at 12 months. Partici- pants did not differ between sites at baseline on condom attitudes, HIV knowledge or self efficacy. At 12 months post baseline, both sites had improved in attitudes, knowledge and efficacy and participant retention was lower at the UTH site (77% versus 82%). Inconsistent sexual barrier users increased to consistent use at both sites after 6 months (HIV positive UTH, 96%, CHC, 99%, HIV negative UTH, 84%, CHC 100%). At 12 months, HIV negative CHC participants maintained higher levels of condom use in comparison with UTH participants (F = 7.17, p = .001). Results illustrate the feasibility and efficacy of conducting group sexual risk reduction interventions in the Zambian community, and the potential for the use of group interventions in conjunction with existing CHC Voluntary Counseling and Testing (VCT) programs.\",\"PeriodicalId\":88329,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The open health services and policy journal\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"45-51\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2008-10-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The open health services and policy journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2174/1874924000801010045\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The open health services and policy journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2174/1874924000801010045","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

摘要

在赞比亚卢萨卡的大学教学医院(UTH)进行了减少性风险干预的试验之后,这项试点研究试图评估在社区卫生中心(CHC)一级进行干预的可行性。教育大学工作人员实施评估和干预,保健中心工作人员提供后勤和行政支持。艾滋病毒血清阳性妇女(CHC n = 200;UTH (n = 612)参加了小组会议,其中男性伴侣被随机分为三次或一次的小组干预组。基线时,不同地点男用和女用避孕套的持续使用情况不同(HIV+ UTH, 73%, CHC, 88%, HIV- UTH, 42%, CHC, 65%);在基线后6个月,这两个地点的组合避孕套使用量都有所增加,并在12个月时保持高于基线的增长。在安全套态度、艾滋病知识和自我效能方面,不同地点的参与者没有差异。在基线后12个月,两个地点的态度、知识和疗效都有所改善,UTH地点的参与者保留率较低(77%对82%)。6个月后,不一致的性屏障使用者在两个地点增加到一致使用(HIV阳性UTH, 96%, CHC, 99%, HIV阴性UTH, 84%, CHC 100%)。在12个月时,与UTH参与者相比,HIV阴性CHC参与者保持了更高的安全套使用率(F = 7.17, p = 0.001)。研究结果说明了在赞比亚社区开展群体性风险降低干预的可行性和有效性,以及将群体干预与现有的CHC自愿咨询和检测(VCT)项目结合使用的潜力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Community-Based Risk Reduction in Zambia
Following the trial of a sexual risk reduction intervention conducted at the University Teaching Hospital (UTH) in Lusaka, Zambia, this pilot study sought to evaluate the feasibility of conducting the intervention at the Community Health Center (CHC) level. UTH staff implemented assessments and the intervention while CHC staff provided logistic and administrative support. HIV seropositive women (CHC n = 200; UTH n = 612) attended group sessions in which male partners were randomized to a three-session or one-session group intervention arm. At baseline, consistent use of male and female condoms differed between sites (HIV+ UTH, 73%, CHC, 88%, HIV- UTH, 42%, CHC 65%); both sites in- creased combined condom use at 6 months post baseline and maintained increases over baseline at 12 months. Partici- pants did not differ between sites at baseline on condom attitudes, HIV knowledge or self efficacy. At 12 months post baseline, both sites had improved in attitudes, knowledge and efficacy and participant retention was lower at the UTH site (77% versus 82%). Inconsistent sexual barrier users increased to consistent use at both sites after 6 months (HIV positive UTH, 96%, CHC, 99%, HIV negative UTH, 84%, CHC 100%). At 12 months, HIV negative CHC participants maintained higher levels of condom use in comparison with UTH participants (F = 7.17, p = .001). Results illustrate the feasibility and efficacy of conducting group sexual risk reduction interventions in the Zambian community, and the potential for the use of group interventions in conjunction with existing CHC Voluntary Counseling and Testing (VCT) programs.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Post-traumatic stress disorder and the care of persons living with HIV/AIDS How do Vested Interests Maintain Outdated Policy? The Case of Food Marketing to New Zealand Children How Healthcare Studies Use Claims Data Patient Centered Care - A Conceptual Model and Review of the State of the Art Erosion in the Healthcare Safety Net: Impacts on Different Population Groups.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1