Suchergebnisse

AbstractResearch has documented associations between relationship stigma, relationship quality and adverse health outcomes among sexual and gender minority couples. However, this work focused primarily on one aspect of an individual's or a couple's identity rather than understanding the intersections of multiple, stigmatized social identities. As part of a larger project focused on testing the efficacy of a couples‐based intervention to improve HIV medication adherence, 144 couples completed measures of relationship stigma, relationship quality, mental health, and substance use. A subset of 25 participants completed in‐depth interviews to better understand the phenomenon of relationship stigma and its impact on their relationships. Quantitative results demonstrated that greater relationship stigma was associated with reduced relationship satisfaction and commitment, as well as greater closeness discrepancy and depressive symptoms. Qualitative findings provided nuanced insights into forms of relationship stigma that often intersected with other types of stigma and related forces of social and structural violence. Results also demonstrated the differential impact that relationship stigma had on couples and the ways in which individuals make adjustments to cope with or actively combat societal stigma. Findings illustrate the importance of attending to intersecting forms of stigma in addressing the well‐being of sexual and gender minority couples.

AbstractIntroductionCOVID‐19 parallels HIV in many ways. Socio‐behavioural science has been critical in elucidating the context and factors surrounding individual levels of engagement with known effective prevention and treatment tools for HIV, thus offering important lessons for ongoing efforts to combat the COVID‐19 pandemic.DiscussionNon‐adherence to effective disease mitigation strategies (e.g. condoms for HIV and masks for COVID‐19) can be attributed in part to prioritizing comfort, convenience and individual autonomy over public health. Importantly, misinformation can fuel denialism and conspiracies that discredit scientific knowledge and motivate nonadherence. These preferences and the extent to which individuals can act on their preferences may be constrained by the structures and culture in which they live. Both HIV and COVID‐19 have been politicized and influenced by evolving recommendations from scientists, clinicians, policymakers and politically motivated organizations. While vaccines are vital for ending both pandemics, their impact will depend on availability and uptake. Four decades of experience with the HIV epidemic have shown that information alone is insufficient to overcome these challenges; interventions must address the underlying, often complex factors that influence human behaviour. This article builds from socio‐behavioural science theory and describes practical and successful approaches to enable and support adherence to prevention and treatment strategies, including vaccine adoption. Key methods include reframing tools to enhance motivation, promoting centralized sources of trusted information, strategic development and messaging with and within key populations (e.g. through social media) and appealing to self‐empowerment, altruism and informed decision making. Orchestrated evidence‐based activism is needed to overcome manipulative politicization, while consistent transparent messaging around scientific discoveries and clinical recommendations are critical for public acceptance and support. Ultimately, the effectiveness of COVID‐19 vaccines will depend on our ability to engender trust in the communities most affected.ConclusionsMany lessons learned from socio‐behavioural science in the HIV pandemic are applicable to the COVID‐19 pandemic. Individual behaviour must be understood within its interpersonal and societal context to address the current barriers to adherence to disease‐mitigating strategies and promote an effective response to the COVID‐19 pandemic, which is likely to be endured for the foreseeable future.

IntroductionCOVID-19 parallels HIV in many ways. Socio-behavioural science has been critical in elucidating the context and factors surrounding individual levels of engagement with known effective prevention and treatment tools for HIV, thus offering important lessons for ongoing efforts to combat the COVID-19 pandemic.DiscussionNon-adherence to effective disease mitigation strategies (e.g. condoms for HIV and masks for COVID-19) can be attributed in part to prioritizing comfort, convenience and individual autonomy over public health. Importantly, misinformation can fuel denialism and conspiracies that discredit scientific knowledge and motivate nonadherence. These preferences and the extent to which individuals can act on their preferences may be constrained by the structures and culture in which they live. Both HIV and COVID-19 have been politicized and influenced by evolving recommendations from scientists, clinicians, policymakers and politically motivated organizations. While vaccines are vital for ending both pandemics, their impact will depend on availability and uptake. Four decades of experience with the HIV epidemic have shown that information alone is insufficient to overcome these challenges; interventions must address the underlying, often complex factors that influence human behaviour. This article builds from socio-behavioural science theory and describes practical and successful approaches to enable and support adherence to prevention and treatment strategies, including vaccine adoption. Key methods include reframing tools to enhance motivation, promoting centralized sources of trusted information, strategic development and messaging with and within key populations (e.g. through social media) and appealing to self-empowerment, altruism and informed decision making. Orchestrated evidence-based activism is needed to overcome manipulative politicization, while consistent transparent messaging around scientific discoveries and clinical recommendations are critical for public acceptance and support. Ultimately, the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines will depend on our ability to engender trust in the communities most affected.ConclusionsMany lessons learned from socio-behavioural science in the HIV pandemic are applicable to the COVID-19 pandemic. Individual behaviour must be understood within its interpersonal and societal context to address the current barriers to adherence to disease-mitigating strategies and promote an effective response to the COVID-19 pandemic, which is likely to be endured for the foreseeable future.

AbstractIntroductionPerspectives on long‐acting injectable cabotegravir/rilpivirine (CAB/RPV‐LA) from HIV health disparity populations are under‐represented in current literature yet crucial to optimize delivery.MethodsBetween August 2022 and May 2023, we conducted in‐depth interviews with people with HIV (PWH) at four HIV clinics in Atlanta, Chicago and San Francisco. Eligibility criteria were current CAB/RPV‐LA use with receipt of ≥3 injections or CAB/RPV‐LA discontinuation. We purposefully sampled for PWH who initiated with viraemia (plasma HIV RNA >50 copies/ml) due to adherence challenges, discontinuers, and cis and trans women. Interviews were coded and analysed using thematic methods grounded in descriptive phenomenology. Clinical data were abstracted from the medical record.ResultsThe sample (San Francisco n = 25, Atlanta n = 20, Chicago n = 14 for total n = 59, median number of injections = 6) consisted of 48 PWH using CAB/RPV‐LA and 11 who had discontinued. The median age was 50 (range 25–73) and 40 (68%) identified as racial/ethnic minorities, 19 (32%) cis or trans women, 16 (29%) were experiencing homelessness/unstable housing, 12 (20%) had recently used methamphetamine or opioids and 11 (19%) initiated with viraemia. All participants except one (who discontinued) had evidence of viral suppression at interview. Typical benefits of CAB/RPV‐LA included increased convenience, privacy and freedom from being reminded of HIV and reduced anxiety about forgetting pills. However, PWH who became virally suppressed through CAB/RPV‐LA use also experienced an amelioration of feelings of shame and negative self‐worth related to oral adherence challenges. Regardless of baseline viral suppression status, successful use of CAB/RPV‐LA amplified positive provider/clinic relationships, and CAB/RPV‐LA was often viewed as less "work" than oral antiretroviral therapy, which created space to attend to other aspects of health and wellness. For some participants, CAB/RPV‐LA remained "work," particularly with regard to injection site pain and visit frequency. At times, these burdens outweighed the aforementioned benefits, resulting in discontinuation.ConclusionsCAB/RPV‐LA offers a range of logistical, psychosocial and care engagement benefits, which are experienced maximally by PWH initiating with viraemia due to adherence challenges; however, benefits do not always outweigh treatment burdens and can result in discontinuation. Our findings on rationales for persistence versus discontinuation can inform both initial and follow‐up patient counselling.

BackgroundThe pursuit of a cure for HIV is a high priority for researchers, funding agencies, governments and people living with HIV (PLWH). To date, over 250 biomedical studies worldwide are or have been related to discovering a safe, effective, and scalable HIV cure, most of which are early translational research and experimental medicine. As HIV cure research increases, it is critical to identify and address the ethical challenges posed by this research.MethodsWe conducted a scoping review of the growing HIV cure research ethics literature, focusing on articles published in English peer-reviewed journals from 2013 to 2021. We extracted and summarized key developments in the ethics of HIV cure research. Twelve community advocates actively engaged in HIV cure research provided input on this summary and suggested areas warranting further ethical inquiry and foresight via email exchange and video conferencing.DiscussionDespite substantial scholarship related to the ethics of HIV cure research, additional attention should focus on emerging issues in six categories of ethical issues: (1) social value (ongoing and emerging biomedical research and scalability considerations); (2) scientific validity (study design issues, such as the use of analytical treatment interruptions and placebos); (3) fair selection of participants (equity and justice considerations); (4) favorable benefit/risk balance (early phase research, benefit-risk balance, risk perception, psychological risks, and pediatric research); (5) informed consent (attention to language, decision-making, informed consent processes and scientific uncertainty); and (6) respect for enrolled participants and community (perspectives of people living with HIV and affected communities and representation).ConclusionHIV cure research ethics has an unfinished agenda. Scientific research and bioethics should work in tandem to advance ethical HIV cure research. Because the science of HIV cure research will continue to rapidly advance, ethical considerations of the major themes we identified will need to be revisited and refined over time.

BackgroundThe pursuit of a cure for HIV is a high priority for researchers, funding agencies, governments and people living with HIV (PLWH). To date, over 250 biomedical studies worldwide are or have been related to discovering a safe, effective, and scalable HIV cure, most of which are early translational research and experimental medicine. As HIV cure research increases, it is critical to identify and address the ethical challenges posed by this research.MethodsWe conducted a scoping review of the growing HIV cure research ethics literature, focusing on articles published in English peer-reviewed journals from 2013 to 2021. We extracted and summarized key developments in the ethics of HIV cure research. Twelve community advocates actively engaged in HIV cure research provided input on this summary and suggested areas warranting further ethical inquiry and foresight via email exchange and video conferencing.DiscussionDespite substantial scholarship related to the ethics of HIV cure research, additional attention should focus on emerging issues in six categories of ethical issues: (1) social value (ongoing and emerging biomedical research and scalability considerations); (2) scientific validity (study design issues, such as the use of analytical treatment interruptions and placebos); (3) fair selection of participants (equity and justice considerations); (4) favorable benefit/risk balance (early phase research, benefit-risk balance, risk perception, psychological risks, and pediatric research); (5) informed consent (attention to language, decision-making, informed consent processes and scientific uncertainty); and (6) respect for enrolled participants and community (perspectives of people living with HIV and affected communities and representation).ConclusionHIV cure research ethics has an unfinished agenda. Scientific research and bioethics should work in tandem to advance ethical HIV cure research. Because the science of HIV cure research will continue to rapidly advance, ethical considerations of the major ...

BACKGROUND: The pursuit of a cure for HIV is a high priority for researchers, funding agencies, governments and people living with HIV (PLWH). To date, over 250 biomedical studies worldwide are or have been related to discovering a safe, effective, and scalable HIV cure, most of which are early translational research and experimental medicine. As HIV cure research increases, it is critical to identify and address the ethical challenges posed by this research. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review of the growing HIV cure research ethics literature, focusing on articles published in English peer-reviewed journals from 2013 to 2021. We extracted and summarized key developments in the ethics of HIV cure research. Twelve community advocates actively engaged in HIV cure research provided input on this summary and suggested areas warranting further ethical inquiry and foresight via email exchange and video conferencing. DISCUSSION: Despite substantial scholarship related to the ethics of HIV cure research, additional attention should focus on emerging issues in six categories of ethical issues: (1) social value (ongoing and emerging biomedical research and scalability considerations); (2) scientific validity (study design issues, such as the use of analytical treatment interruptions and placebos); (3) fair selection of participants (equity and justice considerations); (4) favorable benefit/risk balance (early phase research, benefit-risk balance, risk perception, psychological risks, and pediatric research); (5) informed consent (attention to language, decision-making, informed consent processes and scientific uncertainty); and (6) respect for enrolled participants and community (perspectives of people living with HIV and affected communities and representation). CONCLUSION: HIV cure research ethics has an unfinished agenda. Scientific research and bioethics should work in tandem to advance ethical HIV cure research. Because the science of HIV cure research will continue to rapidly advance, ethical considerations of ...

Background: Managing HIV treatment is a complex multi-dimensional task because of a combination of factors such as stigma and discrimination of some populations who frequently get infected with HIV. In addition, patient-provider encounters have become increasingly multicultural, making effective communication and provision of ethically sound care a challenge. Purpose: This article explores ethical issues that health service providers in the United States and Botswana encountered in their interaction with patients in HIV care. Research design: A descriptive qualitative design was used to collect data from health service providers and patients using focused group discussions. This article is based on responses from health service providers only. Participants and context: This article is based on 11 focused group discussions with a total sample of 71 service providers in seven US sites and one Botswana site. Ethical considerations: Ethical review boards at all the study sites reviewed the study protocol and approved it. Ethical review boards of the study's coordinating centers, Rutgers University and the University of California at San Francisco, also approved it. The study participants provided a written informed consent to participate. Findings: HIV service providers encountered ethical challenges in all the four Beauchamp and Childress' biomedical ethics of respect for patients' autonomy, beneficence, justice, and nonmaleficence. Discussion: The finding that HIV service providers encounter ethical challenges in their interaction with patients is supported by prior studies. The ethical challenges are particularly prominent in multicultural care and resource-constrained care environments. Conclusion: Provision of HIV care is fraught with ethical challenges that tend to pose different issues depending on a given care environment. It is important that strong partnerships are developed among key stakeholders in HIV care. In addition, health service providers need to be provided with resources so they can provide quality and ethically sound care. ; This work was supported by the HIV/AIDS nursing Care and Prevention, National Institutes of Health [J32 NR007081] (Portillo); Irwin Belk Distinguished Professorship, University of North Carolina Wilmington; K24DA037034 (Johnson); and the Government of Botswana Human Resources Development Council.