Validating a measure of anticipated sex work-related stigma among male and female sex workers in Kenya.

Sex workers face different types of sex work-related stigma, which may include anticipated, perceived, experienced, or internalized stigma. Sex work stigma can discourage health care seeking and hamper STI and HIV prevention and treatment efforts. There is a paucity of validated sex work-related stigma measures, and this limits the ability to study the stigma associated with sex work. A cross-sectional survey was conducted that measured anticipated sex work-related stigma among male and female sex workers in Kenya (N = 729). We examined the construct validity and reliability of the anticipated stigma items to establish a conceptually and statistically valid scale. Our analysis supported a 15-item scale measuring five anticipated sex work stigma domains: gossip and verbal abuse from family; gossip and verbal abuse from healthcare workers; gossip and verbal abuse from friends and community; physical abuse; and exclusion. The scale demonstrated good face, content, and construct validity. Reliability was good for all subscales and the overall scale. The scale demonstrated good model fit statistics and good standardized factor loadings. The availability of valid and reliable stigma measures will enhance efforts to characterize and address stigma among sex workers and ultimately support the protection, health and well-being of this vulnerable population.

Results from a difference-in-differences evaluation of health facility HIV and key population stigma-reduction interventions in Ghana.

INTRODUCTION: Stigma undermines all aspects of a comprehensive HIV response, as reflected in recent global initiatives for stigma-reduction. Yet a commensurate response to systematically tackle stigma within country responses has not yet occurred, which may be due to the lack of sufficient evidence documenting evaluated stigma-reduction interventions. With stigma present in all life spheres, health facilities offer a logical starting point for developing and expanding stigma reduction interventions. This study evaluates the impact of a "total facility" stigma-reduction intervention on the drivers and manifestations of stigma and discrimination among health facility staff in Ghana. METHODS: We evaluated the impact of a total facility stigma-reduction intervention by comparing five intervention to five comparable non-intervention health facilities in Ghana. Interventions began in September 2017. Data collection was in June 2017 and April 2018. The primary outcomes were composite indicators for three stigma drivers, self-reported stigmatizing avoidance behaviour, and observed discrimination. The principal intervention variable was whether the respondent worked at an intervention or comparison facility. We estimated intervention effects as differences-in-differences in each outcome, further adjusted using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW). RESULTS: We observed favourable intervention effects for all outcome domains except for stigmatizing attitudes. Preferring not to provide services to people living with HIV (PLHIV) or a key population member improved 11.1% more in intervention than comparison facility respondents (95% CI 3.2 to 19.0). Other significant improvements included knowledge of policies to protect against discrimination (difference-in-differences = 20.4%; 95% CI 12.7 to 28.0); belief that discrimination would be punished (11.2%; 95% CI 0.2 to 22.3); and knowledge of and belief in the adequacy of infection control policies (17.6%; 95% CI 8.3 to 26.9). Reported observation of stigma and discrimination incidents fell by 7.4 percentage points more among intervention than comparison facility respondents, though only marginally significant in the IPTW-adjusted model (p = 0.06). Respondents at intervention facilities were 19.0% (95% CI 12.2 to 25.8) more likely to report that staff behaviour towards PLHIV had improved over the last year than those at comparison facilities. CONCLUSIONS: These results provide a foundation for scaling up health facility stigma-reduction within national HIV responses, though they should be accompanied by rigorous implementation science to ensure ongoing learning and adaptation for maximum effectiveness and long-term impact.

A total facility approach to reducing HIV stigma in health facilities: implementation process and lessons learned.

OBJECTIVES: To describe development and implementation of a three-stage 'total facility' approach to reducing health facility HIV stigma in Ghana and Tanzania, to facilitate replication. DESIGN: HIV stigma in healthcare settings hinders the HIV response and can occur during any interaction between client and staff, between staff, and within institutional processes and structures. Therefore, the design focuses on multiple socioecological levels within a health facility and targets all levels of staff (clinical and nonclinical). METHODS: The approach is grounded in social cognitive theory principles and interpersonal or intergroup contact theory that works to combat stigma by creating space for interpersonal interactions, fostering empathy, and building efficacy for stigma reduction through awareness, skills, and knowledge building as well as through joint action planning for changes needed in the facility environment. The approach targets actionable drivers of stigma among health facility staff: fear of HIV transmission, awareness of stigma, attitudes, and health facility environment. RESULTS: The results are the three-stage process of formative research, capacity building, and integration into facility structures and processes. Key implementation lessons learned included the importance of formative data to catalyze action and shape intervention activities, using participatory training methodologies, involving facility management throughout, having staff, and clients living with HIV facilitate trainings, involving a substantial proportion of staff, mixing staff cadres and departments in training groups, and integrating stigma-reduction into existing structures and processes. CONCLUSION: Addressing stigma in health facilities is critical and this approach offers a feasible, well accepted method of doing so.