The People Living with HIV Stigma Index 2.0: generating critical evidence for change worldwide.

OBJECTIVE(S): To describe the process of updating the People Living with HIV (PLHIV) Stigma Index (Stigma Index) to reflect current global treatment guidelines and to better measure intersecting stigmas and resilience. DESIGN: Through an iterative process driven by PLHIV, the Stigma Index was revised, pretested, and formally evaluated in three cross-sectional studies. METHODS: Between March and October 2017, 1153 surveys (n = 377, Cameroon; n = 390, Senegal; n = 391, Uganda) were conducted with PLHIV at least 18 years old who had known their status for at least 1 year. PLHIV interviewers administered the survey on tablet computers or mobile phones to a diverse group of purposively sampled respondents recruited through PLHIV networks, community-based organizations, HIV clinics, and snowball sampling. Sixty respondents participated in cognitive interviews (20 per country) to assess if questions were understood as intended, and eight focus groups (Uganda only) assessed relevance of the survey, overall. RESULTS: The Stigma Index 2.0 performed well and was relevant to PLHIV in all three countries. HIV-related stigma was experienced by more than one-third of respondents, including in HIV care settings. High rates of stigma experienced by key populations (such as MSM and sex workers) impeded access to HIV services. Many PLHIV also demonstrated resilience per the new PLHIV Resilience Scale. CONCLUSION: The Stigma Index 2.0 is now more relevant to the current context of the HIV/AIDS epidemic and response. Results will be critical for addressing gaps in program design and policies that must be overcome to support PLHIV engaging in services, adhering to antiretroviral therapy, being virally suppressed, and leading healthy, stigma-free lives.

What shapes resilience among people living with HIV? A multi-country analysis of data from the PLHIV Stigma Index 2.0.

OBJECTIVE: To inform efforts to promote greater resilience among people living with HIV (PLHIV), we examined associations between resilience and factors at the individual, interpersonal and structural/policy levels in three countries. DESIGN: Data come from the PLHIV Stigma Index 2.0, a cross-sectional survey with PLHIV, implemented from 2017 to 2019 in Cambodia (n = 1207), the Dominican Republic (n = 891), and Uganda (n = 391). METHODS: Hierarchical multiple regression was used to assess associations between resilience and factors at the individual/interpersonal/structural-policy levels, controlling for potential confounders. Resilience was measured by the previously tested PLHIV Resilience Scale. RESULTS: About 60% of respondents were women; mean time since HIV diagnosis was 11 years in Cambodia and seven in the Dominican Republic /Uganda. Resilience varied substantially across the six province/districts per country (all p < 0.001). In multivariable analyses, higher resilience was associated with lower internalized stigma (all three countries), no experience of human rights abuses (Dominican Republic), no food/housing insecurity (Uganda), and greater community awareness of legal protections for PLHIV (Cambodia and Dominican Republic). HIV-related enacted stigma (i.e., discrimination) in the community was associated with lower resilience in Cambodia, but higher resilience in the Dominican Republic. The set of structural/policy-level factors in Cambodia and the Dominican Republic, and individual-level in Uganda, explained the most variance in resilience. CONCLUSION: Factors at multiple levels affect whether PLHIV in Cambodia, the Dominican Republic, and Uganda report resilience. Multilevel interventions are required to promote resilience among PLHIV, and should incorporate efforts to reduce internalized stigma and promote supportive structural/legal environments including broader awareness of legal protections for PLHIV.

Making the cut: evidence-based lessons for improving the informed consent process for voluntary medical male circumcision in Swaziland and Zambia.

The informed consent (IC) process for voluntary medical male circumcision (VMMC) was evaluated in Zambia and Swaziland as VMMC programs scaled up. In-depth interviews (IDIs) were conducted with clients 1 week after surgery to explore understanding of IC and gauge how expectations of MC surgery compared to actual experiences. In Zambia, key opinion leaders (KOLs) were also interviewed. Some clients equated written IC with releasing the clinic from liability. Most clients felt well prepared for the procedure, although many were surprised by the level of pain experienced during anesthesia and postsurgery. Clients were highly motivated to adhere to wound care, but some were overwhelmed by extensive instructions. Adolescents described barriers to accessing follow-up care and the need for support in overcoming adult gatekeepers. KOLs indicated that IC is not well understood in poorly educated communities. Results led to concrete programmatic changes, including revised patient education materials and more effective anesthesia for longer-lasting pain relief.

Evaluation of 3 approaches for assessing adherence to vaginal gel application in clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: Accurate measurement of adherence to product use is an ongoing challenge in microbicide trials. METHODS: We compared adherence estimates using 2 applicator tests (a dye stain assay [DSA] and an ultraviolet light assay [UVA]), the Wisebag (an applicator container that electronically tracks container openings), and self-reported adherence (ability, frequency, and percent missed doses). Healthy, HIV-negative, nonpregnant US women aged 23 to 45 years received a Wisebag and 32 applicators filled with placebo gel were instructed to insert 1 applicator daily for 30 days, returned the Wisebag and all applicators, and completed an exit interview. Emptied applicators were tested by UVA and then DSA, and scored by 2 blinded readers. Positive and negative controls were randomly included in applicator batches. RESULTS: Among 42 women enrolled, 39 completed the study. Both DSA and UVA yielded similar sensitivity (97% and 95%) and specificity (79% and 79%). Two participants had fully inoperable Wisebags, and 9 had partially inoperable Wisebags. The proportion of participants considered to have high adherence (≥80%) varied: 43% (Wisebag), 46% (UVA), 49% (DSA), and 62% to 82% (self-reports). For estimating high adherence, Wisebag had a sensitivity of 76% (95% confidence interval, 50%-93%) and a specificity of 85% (95% confidence interval, 62%-97%) compared with DSA. Although 28% of participants reported forgetting to open the Wisebag daily, 59% said that it helped them remember gel use. CONCLUSIONS: Dye stain assay and UVA performed similarly. Compared with these tests, self-reports overestimated and Wisebag underestimated adherence. Although Wisebag may encourage gel use, the applicator tests currently seem more useful for measuring use in clinical trials.