Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Bases de dados
País/Região como assunto
Ano de publicação
Tipo de documento
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Sex Transm Dis ; 46(11): 716-721, 2019 11.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31644499

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Home-based human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) testing and education has increased HIV test uptake and access to health services among men. We studied how a home-based antenatal intervention influenced male partner utilization of clinic-based HIV and sexually transmitted infection (STI) services, linkage to HIV care and medical circumcision. METHODS: We conducted a secondary analysis within a randomized controlled trial of pregnant women attending antenatal care in Kenya. Women and their male partners received either a home-based couple intervention or an invitation letter for clinic-based couple HIV testing. The home-based intervention included education on STI symptoms, STI and HIV treatment and male circumcision for HIV prevention. Male self-reported outcomes were compared using relative risks at 6 months postpartum. RESULTS: Among 525 women, we reached 487 (93%) of their male partners; 247 men in the intervention arm and 240 men in the control arm. Men who received the intervention were more likely to report an STI consultation (n = 47 vs. 16; relative risk, 1.59; 95% confidence interval, 1.33-1.89). Among 23 men with newly diagnosed HIV, linkage to HIV care was reported by 4 of 15 in the intervention (3 men had missing linkage data) and 3 of 5 men in the control arms (relative risk, 0.66; 95% confidence interval, 0.34-1.29). Although the intervention identified 3 times more men with new HIV infection, the study lacked power to find significant differences in linkage to HIV care. Few eligible men sought medical circumcision (4 of 72 intervention and 2 of 88 control). CONCLUSIONS: Home-based couple education and testing increased STI consultations among male partners of pregnant women, but appeared insufficient to overcome the barriers involved in linkage to HIV care and medical circumcision.


Assuntos
Infecções por HIV/prevenção & controle , Educação em Saúde/métodos , Parceiros Sexuais , Infecções Sexualmente Transmissíveis/prevenção & controle , Sífilis/prevenção & controle , Adulto , Circuncisão Masculina , Feminino , HIV/efeitos dos fármacos , Infecções por HIV/tratamento farmacológico , Infecções por HIV/epidemiologia , Infecções por HIV/transmissão , Educação em Saúde/estatística & dados numéricos , Humanos , Quênia/epidemiologia , Masculino , Gravidez , Gestantes/educação , Cuidado Pré-Natal , Prevalência , Infecções Sexualmente Transmissíveis/microbiologia , Infecções Sexualmente Transmissíveis/virologia , Sífilis/tratamento farmacológico , Sífilis/epidemiologia , Sífilis/transmissão
2.
J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr ; 72 Suppl 2: S167-73, 2016 08 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27355505

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: Male partner HIV testing has been recognized as an important component of prevention of mother-to-child HIV transmission. Scheduled home-based couple HIV testing may be an effective strategy to reach men. METHODS: Women attending their first antenatal visit at Kisumu County Hospital in Kenya were randomized to home-based education and HIV testing within 2 weeks of enrollment (HOPE) or to written invitations for male partners to attend clinic (INVITE). Male partner HIV testing and maternal child health outcomes were compared at 6 months postpartum. RESULTS: Of 1101 women screened, 620 were eligible and 601 were randomized to HOPE (n = 306) or INVITE (n = 295). At 6 months postpartum, male partners were more than twice as likely [relative risk (RR) = 2.10; 95% CI (CI): 1.81 to 2.42] to have been HIV tested in the HOPE arm [233 (87%)] compared with the INVITE arm [108 (39%)]. Couples in the HOPE arm [192 (77%)] were 3 times as likely (RR = 3.17; 95% CI: 2.53 to 3.98) to have been tested as a couple as the INVITE arm [62 (24%)] and women in the HOPE arm [217 (88%)] were also twice as likely (RR = 2.27; 95% CI: 1.93 to 2.67) to know their partner's HIV status as the INVITE arm [98 (39%)]. More serodiscordant couples were identified in the HOPE arm [33 (13%)] than in the INVITE arm [10 (4%)] (RR = 3.38; 95% CI: 1.70 to 6.71). Maternal child health outcomes of facility delivery, postpartum family planning, and exclusive breastfeeding did not vary by arm. CONCLUSIONS: Home-based HIV testing for pregnant couples resulted in higher uptake of male partner and couple testing, as well as higher rates of HIV status disclosure and identification of serodiscordant couples. However, the intervention did not result in higher uptake of maternal child health outcomes, because facility delivery and postpartum family planning were high in both arms, whereas exclusive breastfeeding was low. The HOPE intervention was successful at its primary aim to increase HIV testing and disclosure among pregnant couples and was able to find more serodiscordant couples compared with the invitation-only strategy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov registry: NCT01784783.


Assuntos
Sorodiagnóstico da AIDS/estatística & dados numéricos , Serviços de Assistência Domiciliar , Parceiros Sexuais , Adulto , Violência Doméstica , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Avaliação de Resultados em Cuidados de Saúde , Gravidez
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA