Changes in condom use among males who have sex with males (MSM): Measuring the effect of HIV prevention programme in Dhaka city

Le résumé fourni par la source

BACKGROUND: A systematic assessment was done to examine the effect of HIV interventions among MSM in Dhaka, Bangladesh. MSM were defined as males having sex with males but did not sell sex in the last year. MSM are hidden, marginalized and stigmatized population groups not only in Bangladesh but also globally. In 2010, HIV interventions for MSM were expanded in 40 districts of Bangladesh through 65 drop-in-centres (DICs) and peer outreach workers. METHODS: Data from two surveys on MSM in Dhaka in 2010 (baseline) and 2013 (midline) were used to analyse the effect of ongoing HIV prevention services. Both surveys used time location sampling to randomly select MSM for risk behaviour interviews. Two outcome variables were considered; condom use in the last anal sex act and consistent condom use during anal sex in the last month. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression methods were used to determine factors associated with condom use. RESULTS: Condom use significantly increased at the midline than baseline (p<0.001 for both). Multivariate analysis showed that having comprehensive knowledge of HIV and participation in HIV prevention programme were positively associated with both last time and consistent condom use. MSM who had comprehensive knowledge of HIV were 1.9 times (95% CI: 1.3-2.8, p = 0.002) and 2.1 times (95% CI: 1.4-3.2, p<0.001) more likely to use condoms than those who did not have comprehensive knowledge of HIV. The likelihood of using condoms among MSM was more than double at the midline than the baseline (p<0.01 for both). However, odds of condom use was significantly lower among those who perceived themselves to be at risk or were not able to assess their own risk of HIV. CONCLUSION: To sustain positive changes in HIV risk behaviours, HIV prevention programmes for MSM need to be continued and strengthened.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.