1 / 21

Challenging Gender Roles among Serodiscordant Couples to Reduce Risks in South Africa

Challenging Gender Roles among Serodiscordant Couples to Reduce Risks in South Africa. W. Zule , A. Minnis , I. Doherty, B. Myers, J. Ndirangu , J., & W. Wechsberg Funded by NIAAA grant number R01AA018076. Background South Africa: Intersection of AOD, HIV and GBV.

caspar
Download Presentation

Challenging Gender Roles among Serodiscordant Couples to Reduce Risks in South Africa

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Challenging Gender Roles among Serodiscordant Couples to Reduce Risks in South Africa W. Zule, A. Minnis, I. Doherty, B. Myers, J. Ndirangu, J., & W. Wechsberg Funded by NIAAA grant number R01AA018076

  2. BackgroundSouth Africa: Intersection of AOD, HIV and GBV • Alcohol and other drug (AOD) use is high, and intersecting with men being abusive and gender-based violence. • Women (especially young women) are at greatest risk of victimization • SA also has a high prevalence of physical and sexual violence and victimization • SA also has more people living with HIV, especially among women from heterosexual transmission

  3. Male Gender Roles in the TownshipsTraditional Power and Control

  4. Couples’ Health CoOp (CHC)Study Addressing AOD, sexual risk, gender roles and HIV risk reduction Cape Town, SA R01AA018076 Funded by NIAAA

  5. Advantages of Bringing Couples Together Responsibility for HIV risk reduction is placed on both members of the couple Safe environment to disclose sensitive issues Can address gender power imbalances re: sexual coercion, condom negotiation, and needle sharing Improve communication skills in vivo with a third party STI and HIV risk reduction can be combined with reproductive health El-Bassel et al., JAIDS, 2010

  6. Mapping Drinking Establishments

  7. Pretest to Pilot test to RCT Developed and Adapted Men Health CoOp intervention Tweaked the Women’s Health CoOp Developed the Couples Health CoOp intervention Mapped 1296 bars using GIS and made into 30 communities that were randomized 300 Couples were recruitedpeer led interventions INlocal community centers

  8. Experimental Design

  9. Goals of Study • Understand how AOD & gender roles relate to risk behaviors and violence. • How time in shebeens affects relationships. • Enhance risk reduction skills & reduce risk behavior. • Increase communication & problem solving skills. • Learn how to enjoy & value each other more.

  10. Example from Intervention about the intersection of AOD, Sexual Risk and Violence

  11. The Couples Health CoOp Biological Results Baseline Prevalence(300 couples) R01AA018076

  12. Serodiscordance of HIV among couples

  13. Bio behavioral outcomes • Favored the Couples Health CoOp intervention • With reduced seroincidence and AOD (will be reported Thursday) However, we went further into the entrenched cultural gender roles…

  14. Outcome Measures • Relationship controlevaluated as “shared decision making” (8 items). • Relationship communication regarding HIV prevention/risk (e.g. condom use and HIV risk behaviors) (11 items). • (No) victimization (i.e. physical or sexual abuse) by partner

  15. Relationship Control (women)

  16. Relationship Control (men)

  17. Relationship Communication (women)

  18. Relationship Communication (men)

  19. (No) Victimization (women) • Women in the separate (MHC/WHC) arm were more likely than women in the Couples arm to report no victimization. • Odds ratio = 3.05; 95% C.I. = 1.55, 6.00

  20. (No) Victimization (males) • There were no significant differences in self-reports of victimization between any of the study arms by males

  21. Conclusions • Overall the results were mixed regarding the benefits of working with partners separately versus working with them as a couple. • Working with both partners in a couple with regard to gender roles appears to work better with the female partner in a gender specific group • In one instance (Communication) men appeared more responsive • Our next step will be to perform couple-level analyses to assess how benefits are distributed within and across couples • Implement the WHC in health care settings with even stronger evidence

More Related