Applying the Health Stigma and Discrimination Framework to Assess HIV Stigma among Health Care Professionals: A Mixed Methods, Community-Based Participatory Research Study.

HIV stigma in health care disrupts the care continuum and negatively affects health outcomes among people living with HIV. Few studies explore HIV stigma from the perspective of health care providers, which was the aim of this mixed-methods, community-based participatory research study. Guided by the Health Stigma Discrimination Framework, we conducted an online survey and focus group interviews with 88 and 18 participants. Data were mixed during interpretation and reporting results. Stigma was low overall and participants reported more stigma among their colleagues. The main drivers of stigma included lack of knowledge and fear. Workplace policies and culture were key stigma facilitators. Stigma manifested highest through the endorsement of stereotypes and in the use of unnecessary precautions when treating people with HIV. This study adds to our understanding of HIV stigma within health care settings, with implications for the development of multi-level interventions to reduce HIV stigma among health care professionals.

Women's experiences after Planned Parenthood's exclusion from a family planning program in Texas.

OBJECTIVE: We assessed the impact on depot medroxyprogesterone continuation when a large care provider was banned from a state-funded family planning program. STUDY DESIGN: We used three methods to assess the effect of the ban: (a) In a records review, we compared how many state program participants returned to two Planned Parenthood affiliates for a scheduled dose of depot medroxyprogesterone acetate (DMPA) immediately after the ban; (b) We conducted phone interviews with 224 former Planned Parenthood patients about DMPA use and access to contraception immediately after the ban; (c) We compared current contraceptive method of our interviewees to that of comparable DMPA users in the National Survey of Family Growth 2006-2010 (NSFG). RESULTS: (a) Fewer program clients returned for DMPA at a large urban Planned Parenthood, compared to a remotely located affiliate (14.4%, vs. 64.8%), reflecting different levels of access to alternative providers in the two cities. (b) Among program participants who went elsewhere for the injection, only 56.8% obtained it at no cost and on time. More than one in five women missed a dose because of barriers, most commonly due to difficulty finding a provider. (c) Compared to NSFG participants, our interviewees used less effective methods of contraception, even more than a year after the ban went into effect. CONCLUSIONS: Injectable contraception use was disrupted during the rollout of the state-funded family planning program. Women living in a remote area of Texas encountered more barriers. IMPLICATIONS: Requiring low-income family planning patients to switch healthcare providers has adverse consequences.