Inconsistent condom use between serodifferent sexual partnerships to the human immunodeficiency virus
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1590/1518-8345.3059.3222Keywords:
Condoms; Unsafe Sex; HIV Infections; Disease Prevention; Nursing Care; HIV SeropositivityAbstract
Objective:
to analyze predictors of inconsistent condom use among HIV-positive people with sexual immunodeficiency virus serodifferent sexual partnership.
Method:
cross-sectional, analytical study with a consecutive non-probabilistic sample consisting of people living with the human immunodeficiency virus with serodifferent sexual partnership and who were in outpatient clinical follow-up. Data were collected through individual interviews guided by a semi-structured questionnaire and subsequently analyzed with bivariate analysis and logistic regression.
Results:
Seven variables were independently associated with inconsistent condom use. Schooling less than 11 years of schooling (4.9 [2.4-10.1]), having multiple partnerships (5.0 [1.3-19.6]), using alcohol (2.1 [1.1 -4.4]) or other drugs (2.8 [1.2-6.3]), do not receive advice from a healthcare professional (2.0 [1.1-3.9]), have no knowledge of treatment as prevention (3.0 [1,2-6,9]) and not knowing that undetectable viral load reduces the risk of human immunodeficiency virus transmission (3.8 [1,1-13,7]) were predictors for inconsistent condom use.
Conclusion:
The study showed that psychosocial factors interfere with consistent condom use between serodifferent partnerships. Thus, it is highlighted that there is a need for comprehensive interventions that include the integration of clinical and psychosocial care.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
RLAE’s authorship concept is based on the substantial contribution by each of the individuals listed as authors, mainly in terms of conceiving and planning the research project, collecting or analyzing and interpreting data, writing and critical review. Indication of authors’ names under the article title is limited to six. If more, authors are listed on the online submission form under Acknowledgements. The possibility of including more than six authors will only be examined on multicenter studies, considering the explanations presented by the authors.Including names of authors whose contribution does not fit into the above criteria cannot be justified. Those names can be included in the Acknowledgements section.
Authors are fully responsible for the concepts disseminated in their manuscripts, which do not necessarily reflect the editors’ and editorial board’s opinion.
