Inconsistent condom use between serodifferent sexual partnerships to the human immunodeficiency virus.
Renata Karina Reis, Elizabete Santos Melo, Nilo Martinez Fernandes and 3 others
PMID 31826163WHAT IT FOUND
Among 286 HIV-positive people with HIV-negative partners, 29% said they sometimes or never used condoms.
Lower education, steady and casual partners, alcohol or drugs during sex, missing counselling, and not knowing undetectable viral load reduces transmission were linked.
Key findings
0183 of 286 participants, or 29%, reported never or sometimes using condoms in the last six months.
02In adjusted analysis, seven factors were independently associated with inconsistent condom use, including less than 11 years of education, having both steady and casual partners, alcohol or other drug use during sex, not receiving professional advice, and poor knowledge about undetectable viral load.
0350.3% of participants reported not talking to their partner about condoms.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for RNs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The study measured behaviour at one time point, so it cannot show that any factor caused inconsistent condom use. Condom use, sexual behaviour, alcohol use, and counselling were self-reported, and the authors note possible answer bias and underestimation of risk. The sample came from five outpatient services in one Brazilian city, so the findings may not apply to other settings. The methods describe simple random sampling, but the authors also list non-random sampling as a limitation. The analysed sample was 286 of 397 interviewed, because only participants with a serodifferent partnership were included.
The easy way to misread this
Do not read these findings as evidence that counselling, education, or partner assessment prevents inconsistent condom use. The study was cross-sectional, relied on self-report, and the authors note possible answer bias and non-random sampling.