Prevalence and factors associated with psychological distress among key populations in Nigeria.

BACKGROUND: Stigmatization and discrimination within healthcare settings deter key populations (KPs) from seeking mental health and psychosocial support (MHPS). Consequently, understanding the prevalence, associated factors, and impact of the MHPSS intervention on psychological distress among Nigeria's KPs is crucial. METHOD: This is a cross-sectional study focused on KPs, including Female Sex Workers (FSW), Men who have Sex with Men (MSM), and People Who Inject Drugs (PWID) enrolled in Heartland Alliance LTD/GTE across 17 One-Stop Shops (OSS) in six states of Nigeria. Data were extracted from the databases of the OSS. PD was assessed using the Mental Health Screening Form III (MHSF-III). Descriptive statistics and univariable and multivariable binary logistic regression models were done using IBM-SPSS version 28. RESULTS: The prevalence of PD among the KPs was 9.7%. Higher rates were observed among FSWs (12.0%). Of the 22310 KPs, the prevalence of PD was 9.7%. The major dependants of PD include being a PWID with PD prevalence of 8.5% and AOR of 1.95 (95% CI: 0.60-0.98, p = 0.015), alcohol intake with PD prevalence of 97.7% and AOR of 21.83 (95% CI: 15.13-56.83, p<0.001), and having experienced gender-based violence with PD prevalence of 99.0% and AOR of 25.70(95% CI: 17.10-38.73, p<0.001). All Participants (100%) were given brief intervention, and 1595 of 2159 (73.8%) were referred for further psychological intervention. The services with the highest proportion were psychoeducation (21.20%), followed by coping skills training (17.70%) and motivational enhancement (12.90%). CONCLUSION: The study highlights the critical need for targeted mental health interventions among KPs in Nigeria, primarily focusing on those with a history of substance abuse and gender-based violence. Despite universal brief interventions, the proportion enrolled in further Psychosocial support indicates a need to improve mental health service utilization among the KPs in Nigeria.

Satisfaction with use of public health and peer-led facilities for HIV prevention services by key populations in Nigeria.

BACKGROUND: The aim of the study was to identify the proportion of female sex workers, men who have sex with men, and people who inject drugs who had accessed HIV prevention services at public health facilities and peer-led facilities, their level of satisfaction with these services, and perceived barriers and challenges to accessing HIV services from public and peer-led HIV prevention service providers. METHODS: A mixed-method approach was used to collect data from key populations in the four states in Nigeria. Quantitative data collected included level of satisfaction with and barriers to use of public and peer-led facilities. In-depth interviews and focus-group discussions were conducted to explore reasons for satisfaction with and barriers to use of services. Descriptive and bivariate analyses were was conducted for quantitative data. Qualitative data were summaried, emerging themes identified, described and quotes reflecting the themes corresponding to interview questions highlighted. RESULTS: Nine hundred sixty-seven persons responded to questions on the use of public health or/and peer-led facilities. Two hundred thirty-eight (49.4%) respondents had received HIV and sexual and reproductive health services through public health facilities, and 236 (48.7%) had received the services through peer-led facilities. Significantly more respondents were satisfied with the quality of services provided by peer-led organisations than with public health facilities with respect to service providers listening to respondent's problems and concerns (p = 0.007),privacy and confidentiality (p = 0.04) and respect of rights of service recipients (p = 0.04). Significantly more respondents using peer-led organisations than those using public health facilities identified no barriers to service access (p = 0.003). More respondents using public health facilities than peer-led facilities identified cost of services (p = 0.01), confidentiality (p = 0.002), waiting time (p < 0.01) and staff attitude (p = 0.001) as barriers to service access. Thee was no difference in the proportion of respondents willing to discontinue their use of either facilities (p = 0.08). Qualitative data revealed that concerns with access of services at the public health facility were due mainly to stigma and the effects of the same-sex prohibition law. CONCLUSION: Key populations were more satisfied receiving HIV prevention services at peer-led organisations than at public health facilities.

Sexual practices, sexual behavior and HIV risk profile of key populations in Nigeria.

BACKGROUND: There is little evidence on the need for differentiated HIV prevention services for men who have sex with men (MSM), female sex workers (FSW) and people who inject drugs (PWID in Nigeria. The aim of the study was to determine and compare the HIV sexual risk profiles of FSW, MSM and PWID resident in Nigeria; and identify factors associated with condom use among the groups. This will help identify if differentiated HIV prevention services are needed for MSM, FSW and PWID in Nigeria. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional study. Data on sexual practices (anal, vaginal and oral sex), history of alcohol and psychoactive substance use, and high risk sexual behaviors for HIV infection (inconsistent use of condom) was collected from study FSW, MSM and PWID resident in Enugu, Nassarawa, Benue, and Akwa-Ibom States of Nigeria between April and June, 2015. Association between sexual practices, alcohol and psychoactive substance use, and HIV sexual risk behaviors; and differences in sexual risk behaviors of MSM, FSW and PWID were determined using Pearson chi-square for categorical variables, and t-test for continuous variables. Determinants of condom use in the last 30 days were identified using logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: The study population consisted of 188 (38.5%) FSW, 145 (29.7%) MSM and 155 (31.8%) PWID. MSM (AOR: 0.17; 95%CI: 0.05-0.67; p = 0.01) and PWID (AOR: 0.07; 95%CI: 0.02-0.21; p < 0.001) were significantly less likely than FSW to have used condom in the last 30 days. A lower proportion of FSW and PWID used condom during anal sex in the last 12 months when compared with MSM (p < 0.001 respectively). The proportion of MSM (23.5%) and FSW (23.4%) who had ever used psychoactive drugs was high. Of those who had ever used psychoactive drugs, 25.0% of FSW and 29.4% of MSM had injected drugs in the last 30 days of the survey. Also, 39.3% of PWID shared needles and syringes. The use of psychoactive substances (AOR: 5.01; 95%CI: 2.59-9.68; p < 0.001) and the ability to negotiate condom use (AOR: 2.04; 95%CI: 1.06-3.93; p = 0.03) were factors associated with condom use in the last 30 days of the survey. CONCLUSION: HIV prevention programs designed for MSM, FSW and PWID need to address inconsistent condom use during sex by addressing condom negotation skills. This sexual risk behavior is common to the three groups.

HIV sexual risk behavior and preferred HIV prevention service outlet by men who have sex with men in Nigeria.

BACKGROUND: The study objectives were to identify differences in HIV sexual risk behavior of men who had sex with other men (MSM) resident in urban and rural Nigeria, their perspectives on need for HIV prevention services and perceived barriers and facilitators to access of HIV prevention services in private, public and peer-led health facilities. METHOD: Data were collected from MSM resident in urban and rural parts of River and Kaduna States. Qualitative assessment sought perspectives on barriers and facilitators of MSM uptake of HIV prevention services. In addition, a questionnaire was administered to seek information on HIV sexual risk behaviors (sexual abuse, age of sexual debut, multiple sexual partners and use of condom at last sexual intercourse), willingness to use and perceived barriers to access of HIV prevention services in public, private and peer-led health facilities, and willingness to use and perception about availability of structural intervention services. Differences in HIV sexual risk behaviors by residential location, and associations between sexual risk behavior and willingness to access HIV prevention services were determined. RESULTS: More MSM resident in urban than rural areas engaged in three or more HIV sexual risk behaviors (25.9% vs 8.7%; p = 0.02). More respondents were willing to access HIV prevention service provided through peer-led health facilities. Less than 35% of respondents identified non-availability of free services as a barrier to HIV prevention service access in the three types of health facilities. More MSM with multiple sexual risk behaviors were willing to access services promoting mental and psychosocial health (p < 0.001), HIV positive peer support programs (p = 0.002) and training on human rights and paralegal services (p < 0.001). Respondents opined that services that assured confidential HIV testing and mitigated structural drivers of HIV infection for MSM provided through peer-led facilities, will increase MSM's uptake of HIV prevention services. CONCLUSION: HIV risk reduction intervention services differentiated by rural and urban residence, may be needed for MSM. Services provided through peer-led facilities, that include mental and psychosocial health care, peer support, human rights and paralegal services will likely increase its use by MSM with more HIV sexual risk behaviors.