Skip to content

Men Together Making a Difference: Reducing HIV/STD Risk Behavior Among South African Men

South African Men Health Promotion Project

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT01490359
Enrollment
1181
Registered
2011-12-13
Start date
2007-11-30
Completion date
2011-04-30
Last updated
2017-12-19

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Human Immunodeficiency Virus Infection, Sexually Transmitted Diseases

Keywords

human immunodeficiency virus, randomized controlled trial, intervention studies, South Africa, men, sexually behavior, social cognitive theory

Brief summary

Sub-Saharan Africa has about 10% of the world's population, but was home to more than 60% of all people living with HIV in 2003. South Africa continues to have the largest number of people living with HIV in the world, and as in other parts of sub-Saharan Africa, heterosexual exposure is the primary HIV transmission category. Worldwide, efforts to stem the spread of HIV among heterosexuals have stressed the impact of HIV on women. Oft-cited statistics indicate that about half of all people living with HIV are women. The strategies typically offered to address the impact of HIV on women are interventions with women. An alternative approach to addressing women's risk of heterosexual transmission of HIV, one that would be an important complement to the predominant approach, is focusing on men. By reducing sexual risk behavior of men, it should be possible to reduce rates of HIV in both men and women. The rates in men would decline because they are the recipients of the intervention; rates in women would decline because they have sex with men. Interventions aimed at men could take into account the power that men have in sexual decision-making and risk taking. However, whether one considers the US literature or the international literature, few randomized controlled trials of HIV/STD risk-reduction interventions have focused on heterosexual men. Accordingly, the purpose of this research is to develop and test the efficacy of an intervention to curb HIV/STD risk-associated behavior in South African men who have sex with women. A cluster-randomized controlled trial design will be used to reduce the potential for contamination between treatment arms that would be present if individuals were randomized. An attention control group will be used to control for Hawthorne effects, special attention, and group interaction. Matched pairs of neighborhoods in Black townships in Eastern Cape Province, South Africa similar on key characteristics will be created, 22 pairs will be randomly selected, and men will be recruited. One neighborhood in each pair will be randomly assigned to each of the 2 study arms. We hypothesized that men who receive a culturally appropriate theory-based HIV/STD risk-reduction intervention will be more likely to report consistently using condoms during intercourse in the 12-month post intervention period than will men who receive an attention-control intervention, adjusting for baseline condom use.

Detailed description

Sub-Saharan Africa has just over 10% of the world's population, but according to UNAIDS was home to more than 60% of all people living with HIV in 2003-some 25.4 million people. South Africa continues to have the largest number of people living with HIV in the world. As in other parts of sub-Saharan Africa, heterosexual exposure is the primary HIV transmission category. An estimated 5.3 million South Africans-2.9 million women and 2.4 million men-were living with HIV at the end of 2003. Worldwide, efforts to stem the spread of HIV among heterosexuals have stressed the impact of HIV on women. Oft-cited statistics indicate that about half of all people living with HIV are women. It is often suggested that women are seldom free to make empowered choices and face a range of HIV-related vulnerabilities that men do not face-many of which are embedded in the social relations and economic realities of their societies. Women's economic dependence on their male partners and the fact that women do not have the power to abstain from sex or to insist on condom use-even when they suspect that their man has other sexual partners and might have HIV-is emphasized. The hazards of young women's sexual relationships with older men and the high rate of rape and other forms of sexual coercion are cited. Men are typically mentioned as injection drug users, as having sex with other men-whether as MSMs or being on the down low-or as being the cause of the spread of HIV in women. The strategies typically offered to address the impact of HIV on women are interventions with women. For instance, it is recommended that women be taught the information and skills to make decisions about the terms of their sexual relationships, that methods of protection that women can control (e.g., microbicides) be developed, and that boosting women's economic opportunities and social power should be seen as part and parcel of potentially successful and sustainable HIV prevention strategies. To be sure, there is an alternative approach to addressing women's risk of heterosexual transmission of HIV, one that would be important complement to the predominant approach: namely, focusing on men. Although it is noted that HIV is affecting women most severely in places where heterosexual exposure is a dominant mode of transmission, this seldom leads to a recommendation that interventions be developed to change men's behavior. Yet, by reducing men's sexual risk behavior, it should be possible to reduce rates of HIV in both men and women. Men's rates would decline because they are the recipients of the intervention; women's rates would decline because they have sex with men. Interventions targeting men could take into account the power that men have in sexual decision-making and risk taking. However, whether one considers the US literature or the international literature, few randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of HIV/STD risk-reduction interventions have targeted heterosexual men. Elwy and colleagues 2002 review of HIV/STD prevention intervention studies revealed that only 12 of 1157 studies worldwide were conducted on males only. Most were not RCTs demonstrating intervention efficacy. Only 2 demonstrated significant effects on mediators and behaviors, and neither was a RCT. In addition, scant attention has focused on the general population of heterosexual men in any region. Indeed, 8 of the 12 studies focused on incarcerated men, STD patients, substance abusers, miners, or truck drivers. To address this gap in the literature, the proposed trial will focus on men who are more representative of the general population. In many developing countries, including South Africa, the HIV/AIDS epidemic is generalized, and there is a need to develop and test interventions for a broad range of the population, not just special high-risk sub-populations. Accordingly, the purpose of this research is to develop and test the efficacy of an intervention to reduce behaviors that create the risk for contracting and transmitting STD, including HIV, among South African men who have sex with women. A cluster-randomized control trial design will be used to reduce the potential for contamination between treatment arms that would be present if individuals were randomized. An attention control group will be used to control for Hawthorne effects, special attention, and group interaction. Men will be recruited from Black townships surrounding East London, including Mdantsane, Scenery Park, Duncan, Village, and Gompo Town, and the semi-rural area of Berlin in the Eastern Cape Province of South Africa. More than 98% of the residents of these areas are Black Africans, and isiXhosa is the first language for 98.8% of the population. There are 206 neighborhoods defined as geographical clusters tied to census data in this catchment area, allowing the creation of 103 matched pairs of neighborhoods similar on the percentage isiXhosa-speaking, percentage married, percentage male, percentage living in informal dwellings, percentage unemployed, and population size. From the 103 matched pairs, 22 pairs will be randomly selected for the trial. One neighborhood in each pair will be randomly assigned to each of the 2 study arms. Before recruiting from a neighborhood, meetings with community leaders (e.g., councilor, clergy) will be held to enlist their support. In addition, a meeting will be held to inform men in the neighborhood about the study. Recruiters will inform potential participants about the study, obtain consent to be screened, and conduct a brief screening interview to determine eligibility and willingness to participate. Eligible men will be invited to participate in the Men, Together Making A Difference Project designed to understand men's behaviors that may create health risks such as heart disease, cancer, and STDs, especially HIV, and to find ways to teach men how to reduce these risks. A common participant recruitment and enrollment protocol, including use of the same posters and other materials, will be followed in the neighborhoods in both conditions. Eligible men will be recruited in advance of randomization so that at the time they agree to participate they will be blind to the specific intervention they will receive. This procedure will reduce the probability of self-selection bias into the different conditions of the trial. All participants will complete self-report measures via audio computer-assisted self-interviewing before the intervention, immediately after, and 6 and 12 months after the intervention. Several steps will be taken to increase the validity of self-report measures. Participants will be given a calendar, with the dates clearly marked. This will make salient to respondents the dates that are included when they are asked to recall their behavior in the past 3 months and that they should be specific. The importance of responding honestly will be emphasized. They will be informed that their responses will be used to create programs for South African men like themselves and that this will be possible only if they answer the questions honestly. This pits the social responsibility motive against the social desirability motive. Participants will be assured that their responses will be kept confidential. Facilitators who lead the intervention groups will not be involved in any way in the data collection. The use of ACASI should also serve to increase participants' motivation to respond accurately. There are 2 Specific Aims. Aim 1 is to test the primary hypothesis that men who receive a culturally appropriate theory-based HIV/STD risk-reduction intervention will be more likely to report consistently using condoms during vaginal intercourse in the 12-month post intervention period than will men who receive an attention-control intervention. Aim 2 is to test the secondary hypothesis that outcome expectancies and self-efficacy to use condoms mediate the HIV/STD risk-reduction intervention's effect on condom use. In addition, an exploratory aim is to conduct hypothesis-generating analyses on whether the efficacy of the intervention varies depending on neighborhood characteristics or participants' baseline characteristics. The effects of HIV/STD risk-reduction interventions may differ as a function of the neighborhood's unemployment rate, percentage living in informal dwellings/shacks, percentage married, or sex ratio. Potential individual-level moderators include age, marital status, language use (English versus isiXhosa), and alcohol and drug use. The unit of inference in this trial is the individual. This is because the trial is designed to test the efficacy of a behavior-change intervention based on individual-level behavior change theory. As Donner and Klar in 2000 noted in their influential textbook on cluster-randomized trial, the unit of inference, not the unit of randomization, determines the unit of analysis. The data will be analyzed using an intention-to-treat mode, with participants analyzed based on their intervention assignment, regardless of the number of intervention or data-collection sessions attended. The primary aim focuses on testing for significant differences between two treatment conditions over the post intervention period. Major statistical challenges arise in the proper handling of repeated clustered outcomes. Each variable of interest is completed by each man, nested within a neighborhood, thus creating a correlated outcome. Moreover, the multiple assessments of each variable over the study period produce correlated repeated outcomes. The primary challenge in the analysis of such data is appropriate adjustments for the differential treatment means between clusters and the correlations among the observations within a cluster (cluster effects). Most statistical models assume stochastic independence among observations and thus are inappropriate for clustered data. In this trial, generalized estimating equations (GEE) modeling will be employed to handle the clustered data appropriately. GEE modeling avoids explicit modeling of the within-cluster correlations by basing statistical inferences of model parameters on marginalized likelihood or generalized estimating equations. Since GEE requires a relatively large sample size, it is not appropriate for small studies. Given the large sample size, GEE is appropriate for in this trial. The implementation for this trial is relatively straightforward. For instance, to determine whether a greater percentage of the men who receive the HIV/STD risk-reduction intervention report consistent condom use 6 and 12 months post intervention, as compared with those who received the health-promotion intervention, the model will include time-independent covariates, baseline measure of consistent condom use, intervention type, and time (2 categories representing 6- and 12-month follow-up), which will provide the effect of the intervention over the 2 follow-up visits. A sample size calculation was performed to detect an a priori effect size of a 10% increase in consistent condom use from 32% to 42% in the HIV/STD risk-reduction intervention condition, adjusting for the expected variance inflation due to clustering. A 10% increase was selected as a clinically and substantively important effect size. Based on pilot data, an intraclass correlation (ICC) of 0.01 was estimated. Assuming alpha = 0.05, a 2-tailed test, ICC = 0.01, 15% attrition at 12-month follow-up, and N = 1,152 men in the trial from 44 neighborhoods with an average of 26 men in each neighborhood, the trial was estimated to have 81% power to detect a 10% increase in consistent condom use from 32% to 42% in the HIV/STD intervention group. Assuming the same effect size, hypothesis tests on secondary sexual behavior outcomes and theoretical mediator variables will have similar statistical power.

Interventions

BEHAVIORALMen Making a Difference HIV/STD Risk Reduction Intervention

Developed based on social cognitive theory and extensive formative research, Men Together Making a Difference HIV/STD risk-reduction intervention consists of 6 75-minute modules designed to increase beliefs that support condom use; skill and self-efficacy to use condoms; and HIV/STD risk-reduction knowledge. Two modules are implemented in each of 3 weekly sessions. It is highly structured and implemented in small groups of 9 to 15 men led by a male, isiXhosa-speaking facilitators using standardized intervention manuals. It includes interactive exercises, games, brainstorming, role-playing, take-home assignments, group discussions, and videos, produced specifically for the interventions, shot in authentic township settings, including a shebeen (i.e., an informal alcohol outlet).

The health-promotion intervention was designed to control for non-specific features including group interaction and special attention. It was structurally similar to the HIV/STD risk-reduction intervention in that it contained activities similar to the HIV/STD risk-reduction intervention but focused on behaviors linked to the risk of heart disease, hypertension, stroke, diabetes, and certain cancers-leading causes of morbidity and mortality among South Africans. It also consisted of 6 75-minute modules implemented 2 modules per week during 3 weekly sessions led by isiXhosa speaking male facilitators. It was designed to increase fruit and vegetable consumption and physical activity and decrease excessive alcohol consumption.

Sponsors

University of Fort Hare
CollaboratorOTHER
Temple University
CollaboratorOTHER
Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD)
CollaboratorNIH
University of Pennsylvania
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
PREVENTION
Masking
SINGLE (Subject)

Masking description

Participants were masked to intervention arm at time of recruitment.

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
MALE
Age
18 Years to 45 Years
Healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

* Men ages 18 to 45 years * Reside in a randomly selected neighborhoods * Report vaginal intercourse in the previous 3 months * Have a photo identification

Exclusion criteria

* Plan to relocate from the area within the next 15 months

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Self-reported Consistent Condom Use During Vaginal Intercourse in the Past 3 MonthsBaseline, 6 months, 12 months post-interventionMen who reported at least 1 vaginal intercourse act in the past 3 months and whose number of reported condom-protected vaginal intercourse acts equaled their number of vaginal intercourse acts were coded as practicing consistent or 100% condom use. Men who reported at least 1 vaginal intercourse act and whose reported number of condom-protected vaginal intercourse acts was less than their number of vaginal intercourse acts were coded as not practicing consistent condom use. Separate binary variables reflected consistent condom use with primary partners and casual partners.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Self-reported Condom Use at Most Recent Vaginal IntercourseBaseline, 6 months, 12 months post interventionThe respondents' self-report of using a condom during their most recent vaginal intercourse. Calculated separately for steady and casual partners.
Frequency of Condom Use in the Past 3 MonthsBaseline, 6 months, 12 months post interventionRespondents' rating on a 5-point scale from 1 (never) to 5 (always) how often they used a condom during vaginal intercourse. Measured separately for steady and casual partners.
Talked to Partner About Condom UseBaseline, 6 months, 12 months post interventionA binary variable indicating whether the participants talked to partner about using condoms in the past 90 days.
The Self-reported Proportion of Condom-protected Acts of Vaginal Intercourse in the Past 3 MonthsBaseline, 6 months, 12 months post interventionThe proportion of condom-protected acts of vaginal intercourse is defined as the self-reported number of acts of vaginal intercourse in which the respondent used a condom in the past 3 months divided by the total number of acts of vaginal intercourse the respondent reported in the past 3 months. Calculated separately for steady and casual partners.
Heterosexual Anal Intercourse in the Past 3 MonthsBaseline, 6 months, 12 months post interventionThe report of having anal intercourse with a woman in the past 3 months
Multiple Vaginal Partners in the Past 3 MonthsBaseline, 6 months, 12 months post interventionThe report of having vaginal intercourse with 2 or more women in the past 3 months.
Condomless Vaginal Intercourse in the Past 3 MonthsBaseline, 6 months, and 12 months post-interventionA binary variable indicating whether participant reported having vaginal intercourse without using a condom in the past 3 months (0 = did not have vaginal intercourse or always used a condom; 1= did have vaginal intercourse without using a condom)

Participant flow

Participants by arm

ArmCount
HIV/STD Risk-reduction
Men Making a Difference HIV/STD Risk Reduction Intervention was designed to reduce sexual risk behaviors that increase risk of HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases. Men Making a Difference HIV/STD Risk Reduction Intervention: Developed based on social cognitive theory and extensive formative research, it consists of 6 75-minute modules designed to increase beliefs that support condom use; skill and self-efficacy to use condoms; and HIV/STD risk-reduction knowledge. Two modules are implemented in each of 3 weekly sessions. It is highly structured and implemented in small groups of 9 to 15 men led by a male, isiXhosa-speaking facilitators using standardized intervention manuals. It includes interactive exercises, games, brainstorming, role-playing, take-home assignments, group discussions, and videos, produced specifically for the interventions, shot in authentic township settings, including a shebeen (i.e., an informal alcohol outlet).
609
Health Promotion Control
Health Promotion Intervention was designed to increase physical activity, healthful diet, and other behaviors to reduce risk of noncommunicable diseases, including diabetes, hypertension, and cancers. Health Promotion Control: The health-promotion intervention was designed to control for non-specific features including group interaction and special attention. It was structurally similar to the HIV/STD risk-reduction intervention in that it contained activities similar to the HIV/STD risk-reduction intervention but focused on behaviors linked to the risk of heart disease, hypertension, stroke, diabetes, and certain cancers-leading causes of morbidity and mortality among South Africans. It also consisted of 6 75-minute modules implemented 2 modules per week during 3 weekly sessions led by isiXhosa speaking male facilitators. It was designed to increase fruit and vegetable consumption and physical activity and decrease excessive alcohol consumption.
572
Total1,181

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicHIV/STD Risk-reductionHealth Promotion ControlTotal
Age, Categorical
<=18 years
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Age, Categorical
>=65 years
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Age, Categorical
Between 18 and 65 years
609 Participants572 Participants1181 Participants
Alcohol dependent
Alcohol dependent
377 participants330 participants707 participants
Alcohol dependent
Not alcohol dependent
232 participants242 participants474 participants
Completed high school
Completed high school
279 participants239 participants518 participants
Completed high school
Less than high school
330 participants333 participants663 participants
Employment Status
Employed
184 participants204 participants388 participants
Employment Status
Not employed
425 participants368 participants793 participants
Married
Married
27 participants41 participants68 participants
Married
Not Married
582 participants531 participants1113 participants
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Black South African
609 participants572 participants1181 participants
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Not Black South African
0 participants0 participants0 participants
Region of Enrollment
South Africa
609 participants572 participants1181 participants
Sex: Female, Male
Female
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
609 Participants572 Participants1181 Participants

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
EG001
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
— / —— / —
other
Total, other adverse events
0 / 6090 / 572
serious
Total, serious adverse events
0 / 6090 / 572

Outcome results

Primary

Self-reported Consistent Condom Use During Vaginal Intercourse in the Past 3 Months

Men who reported at least 1 vaginal intercourse act in the past 3 months and whose number of reported condom-protected vaginal intercourse acts equaled their number of vaginal intercourse acts were coded as practicing consistent or 100% condom use. Men who reported at least 1 vaginal intercourse act and whose reported number of condom-protected vaginal intercourse acts was less than their number of vaginal intercourse acts were coded as not practicing consistent condom use. Separate binary variables reflected consistent condom use with primary partners and casual partners.

Time frame: Baseline, 6 months, 12 months post-intervention

Population: Participants with data at baseline and at least one follow-up.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
HIV/STD Risk-reductionSelf-reported Consistent Condom Use During Vaginal Intercourse in the Past 3 MonthsBaseline steady partner121 Participants
HIV/STD Risk-reductionSelf-reported Consistent Condom Use During Vaginal Intercourse in the Past 3 Months6 mo steady partner125 Participants
HIV/STD Risk-reductionSelf-reported Consistent Condom Use During Vaginal Intercourse in the Past 3 Months12 mo steady partner119 Participants
HIV/STD Risk-reductionSelf-reported Consistent Condom Use During Vaginal Intercourse in the Past 3 MonthsBaseline casual partners91 Participants
HIV/STD Risk-reductionSelf-reported Consistent Condom Use During Vaginal Intercourse in the Past 3 Months6 mo casual partners60 Participants
HIV/STD Risk-reductionSelf-reported Consistent Condom Use During Vaginal Intercourse in the Past 3 Months12 mo casual partners56 Participants
Health Promotion ControlSelf-reported Consistent Condom Use During Vaginal Intercourse in the Past 3 Months6 mo casual partners58 Participants
Health Promotion ControlSelf-reported Consistent Condom Use During Vaginal Intercourse in the Past 3 MonthsBaseline steady partner103 Participants
Health Promotion ControlSelf-reported Consistent Condom Use During Vaginal Intercourse in the Past 3 MonthsBaseline casual partners78 Participants
Health Promotion ControlSelf-reported Consistent Condom Use During Vaginal Intercourse in the Past 3 Months6 mo steady partner93 Participants
Health Promotion ControlSelf-reported Consistent Condom Use During Vaginal Intercourse in the Past 3 Months12 mo casual partners48 Participants
Health Promotion ControlSelf-reported Consistent Condom Use During Vaginal Intercourse in the Past 3 Months12 mo steady partner81 Participants
Comparison: Assuming alpha = 0.05, a 2-tailed test, ICC = 0.01, 15% attrition at 12-month follow-up, and N = 1,152 men in the trial from 44 neighborhoods with an average of 26 men in each neighborhood, the trial was estimated to have 81% power to detect a 10% increase in consistent condom use from 32% to 42% in the HIV/STI intervention group.p-value: 0.00895% CI: [1.03, 1.71]generalized estimating equations (GEE)
Secondary

Condomless Vaginal Intercourse in the Past 3 Months

A binary variable indicating whether participant reported having vaginal intercourse without using a condom in the past 3 months (0 = did not have vaginal intercourse or always used a condom; 1= did have vaginal intercourse without using a condom)

Time frame: Baseline, 6 months, and 12 months post-intervention

Population: Participants with data at baseline and at least one post-intervention assessment.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
HIV/STD Risk-reductionCondomless Vaginal Intercourse in the Past 3 MonthsBaseline steady partner281 Participants
HIV/STD Risk-reductionCondomless Vaginal Intercourse in the Past 3 Months6 mo steady partner231 Participants
HIV/STD Risk-reductionCondomless Vaginal Intercourse in the Past 3 Months12 mo steady partner231 Participants
HIV/STD Risk-reductionCondomless Vaginal Intercourse in the Past 3 MonthsBaseline casual partner112 Participants
HIV/STD Risk-reductionCondomless Vaginal Intercourse in the Past 3 Months6 mo casual partner82 Participants
HIV/STD Risk-reductionCondomless Vaginal Intercourse in the Past 3 Months12 mo casual partner84 Participants
Health Promotion ControlCondomless Vaginal Intercourse in the Past 3 Months6 mo casual partner83 Participants
Health Promotion ControlCondomless Vaginal Intercourse in the Past 3 MonthsBaseline steady partner263 Participants
Health Promotion ControlCondomless Vaginal Intercourse in the Past 3 MonthsBaseline casual partner107 Participants
Health Promotion ControlCondomless Vaginal Intercourse in the Past 3 Months6 mo steady partner220 Participants
Health Promotion ControlCondomless Vaginal Intercourse in the Past 3 Months12 mo casual partner83 Participants
Health Promotion ControlCondomless Vaginal Intercourse in the Past 3 Months12 mo steady partner230 Participants
Secondary

Frequency of Condom Use in the Past 3 Months

Respondents' rating on a 5-point scale from 1 (never) to 5 (always) how often they used a condom during vaginal intercourse. Measured separately for steady and casual partners.

Time frame: Baseline, 6 months, 12 months post intervention

Population: Participants with data from baseline and at least one post-intervention assessment.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
HIV/STD Risk-reductionFrequency of Condom Use in the Past 3 MonthsBaseline Steady partners2.991 units on a scaleStandard Error 0.078
HIV/STD Risk-reductionFrequency of Condom Use in the Past 3 MonthsBaseline Casual partners3.712 units on a scaleStandard Error 0.093
HIV/STD Risk-reductionFrequency of Condom Use in the Past 3 Months6 mo Steady partners3.309 units on a scaleStandard Error 0.079
HIV/STD Risk-reductionFrequency of Condom Use in the Past 3 Months6 mo Casual partners3.892 units on a scaleStandard Error 0.101
HIV/STD Risk-reductionFrequency of Condom Use in the Past 3 Months12 mo Steady partners3.238 units on a scaleStandard Error 0.077
HIV/STD Risk-reductionFrequency of Condom Use in the Past 3 Months12 mo Casual partners3.702 units on a scaleStandard Error 0.109
Health Promotion ControlFrequency of Condom Use in the Past 3 Months12 mo Steady partners3.029 units on a scaleStandard Error 0.081
Health Promotion ControlFrequency of Condom Use in the Past 3 MonthsBaseline Steady partners3.041 units on a scaleStandard Error 0.083
Health Promotion ControlFrequency of Condom Use in the Past 3 Months6 mo Casual partners3.594 units on a scaleStandard Error 0.11
Health Promotion ControlFrequency of Condom Use in the Past 3 MonthsBaseline Casual partners3.603 units on a scaleStandard Error 0.109
Health Promotion ControlFrequency of Condom Use in the Past 3 Months12 mo Casual partners3.649 units on a scaleStandard Error 0.111
Health Promotion ControlFrequency of Condom Use in the Past 3 Months6 mo Steady partners2.931 units on a scaleStandard Error 0.085
Secondary

Heterosexual Anal Intercourse in the Past 3 Months

The report of having anal intercourse with a woman in the past 3 months

Time frame: Baseline, 6 months, 12 months post intervention

Population: Participants with data at baseline and at least one post-intervention assessment.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
HIV/STD Risk-reductionHeterosexual Anal Intercourse in the Past 3 MonthsBaseline Steady partners59 Participants
HIV/STD Risk-reductionHeterosexual Anal Intercourse in the Past 3 MonthsBaseline Casual partners41 Participants
HIV/STD Risk-reductionHeterosexual Anal Intercourse in the Past 3 Months6 mo Steady partners42 Participants
HIV/STD Risk-reductionHeterosexual Anal Intercourse in the Past 3 Months6 mo Casual partners25 Participants
HIV/STD Risk-reductionHeterosexual Anal Intercourse in the Past 3 Months12 mo Steady partners35 Participants
HIV/STD Risk-reductionHeterosexual Anal Intercourse in the Past 3 Months12 mo Casual partners20 Participants
Health Promotion ControlHeterosexual Anal Intercourse in the Past 3 Months12 mo Steady partners35 Participants
Health Promotion ControlHeterosexual Anal Intercourse in the Past 3 MonthsBaseline Steady partners58 Participants
Health Promotion ControlHeterosexual Anal Intercourse in the Past 3 Months6 mo Casual partners31 Participants
Health Promotion ControlHeterosexual Anal Intercourse in the Past 3 MonthsBaseline Casual partners35 Participants
Health Promotion ControlHeterosexual Anal Intercourse in the Past 3 Months12 mo Casual partners18 Participants
Health Promotion ControlHeterosexual Anal Intercourse in the Past 3 Months6 mo Steady partners48 Participants
Secondary

Multiple Vaginal Partners in the Past 3 Months

The report of having vaginal intercourse with 2 or more women in the past 3 months.

Time frame: Baseline, 6 months, 12 months post intervention

Population: Participants with data at baseline and at least one post-intervention assessment.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
HIV/STD Risk-reductionMultiple Vaginal Partners in the Past 3 MonthsBaseline256 Participants
HIV/STD Risk-reductionMultiple Vaginal Partners in the Past 3 Months6 mo199 Participants
HIV/STD Risk-reductionMultiple Vaginal Partners in the Past 3 Months12 mo199 Participants
Health Promotion ControlMultiple Vaginal Partners in the Past 3 MonthsBaseline220 Participants
Health Promotion ControlMultiple Vaginal Partners in the Past 3 Months6 mo191 Participants
Health Promotion ControlMultiple Vaginal Partners in the Past 3 Months12 mo200 Participants
Secondary

Self-reported Condom Use at Most Recent Vaginal Intercourse

The respondents' self-report of using a condom during their most recent vaginal intercourse. Calculated separately for steady and casual partners.

Time frame: Baseline, 6 months, 12 months post intervention

Population: Participants with data at baseline and at least one post-intervention assessment.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
HIV/STD Risk-reductionSelf-reported Condom Use at Most Recent Vaginal IntercourseBaseline Steady partners193 Participants
HIV/STD Risk-reductionSelf-reported Condom Use at Most Recent Vaginal IntercourseBaseline Casual partners119 Participants
HIV/STD Risk-reductionSelf-reported Condom Use at Most Recent Vaginal Intercourse6 mo Steady partners216 Participants
HIV/STD Risk-reductionSelf-reported Condom Use at Most Recent Vaginal Intercourse6 mo Casual partners96 Participants
HIV/STD Risk-reductionSelf-reported Condom Use at Most Recent Vaginal Intercourse12 mo Steady partners204 Participants
HIV/STD Risk-reductionSelf-reported Condom Use at Most Recent Vaginal Intercourse12 mo Casual partners80 Participants
Health Promotion ControlSelf-reported Condom Use at Most Recent Vaginal Intercourse12 mo Steady partners176 Participants
Health Promotion ControlSelf-reported Condom Use at Most Recent Vaginal IntercourseBaseline Steady partners175 Participants
Health Promotion ControlSelf-reported Condom Use at Most Recent Vaginal Intercourse6 mo Casual partners85 Participants
Health Promotion ControlSelf-reported Condom Use at Most Recent Vaginal IntercourseBaseline Casual partners108 Participants
Health Promotion ControlSelf-reported Condom Use at Most Recent Vaginal Intercourse12 mo Casual partners75 Participants
Health Promotion ControlSelf-reported Condom Use at Most Recent Vaginal Intercourse6 mo Steady partners162 Participants
Secondary

Talked to Partner About Condom Use

A binary variable indicating whether the participants talked to partner about using condoms in the past 90 days.

Time frame: Baseline, 6 months, 12 months post intervention

Population: Participants with data at baseline and at least one post-intervention assessment.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
HIV/STD Risk-reductionTalked to Partner About Condom UseBaseline Steady partners318 Participants
HIV/STD Risk-reductionTalked to Partner About Condom UseBaseline Casual partners145 Participants
HIV/STD Risk-reductionTalked to Partner About Condom Use6 mo Steady partners310 Participants
HIV/STD Risk-reductionTalked to Partner About Condom Use6 mo Casual partners122 Participants
HIV/STD Risk-reductionTalked to Partner About Condom Use12 mo Steady partners294 Participants
HIV/STD Risk-reductionTalked to Partner About Condom Use12 mo Casual partners105 Participants
Health Promotion ControlTalked to Partner About Condom Use12 mo Steady partners245 Participants
Health Promotion ControlTalked to Partner About Condom UseBaseline Steady partners269 Participants
Health Promotion ControlTalked to Partner About Condom Use6 mo Casual partners100 Participants
Health Promotion ControlTalked to Partner About Condom UseBaseline Casual partners124 Participants
Health Promotion ControlTalked to Partner About Condom Use12 mo Casual partners90 Participants
Health Promotion ControlTalked to Partner About Condom Use6 mo Steady partners243 Participants
Secondary

The Self-reported Proportion of Condom-protected Acts of Vaginal Intercourse in the Past 3 Months

The proportion of condom-protected acts of vaginal intercourse is defined as the self-reported number of acts of vaginal intercourse in which the respondent used a condom in the past 3 months divided by the total number of acts of vaginal intercourse the respondent reported in the past 3 months. Calculated separately for steady and casual partners.

Time frame: Baseline, 6 months, 12 months post intervention

Population: Participants with data at baseline and at least one post-intervention assessment.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
HIV/STD Risk-reductionThe Self-reported Proportion of Condom-protected Acts of Vaginal Intercourse in the Past 3 MonthsBaseline Steady partners0.524 proportion of actsStandard Error 0.021
HIV/STD Risk-reductionThe Self-reported Proportion of Condom-protected Acts of Vaginal Intercourse in the Past 3 MonthsBaseline Casual partners0.713 proportion of actsStandard Error 0.024
HIV/STD Risk-reductionThe Self-reported Proportion of Condom-protected Acts of Vaginal Intercourse in the Past 3 Months6 mo Steady partners0.585 proportion of actsStandard Error 0.022
HIV/STD Risk-reductionThe Self-reported Proportion of Condom-protected Acts of Vaginal Intercourse in the Past 3 Months6 mo Casual partners0.712 proportion of actsStandard Error 0.029
HIV/STD Risk-reductionThe Self-reported Proportion of Condom-protected Acts of Vaginal Intercourse in the Past 3 Months12 mo Steady partners0.613 proportion of actsStandard Error 0.021
HIV/STD Risk-reductionThe Self-reported Proportion of Condom-protected Acts of Vaginal Intercourse in the Past 3 Months12 mo Casual partners0.678 proportion of actsStandard Error 0.031
Health Promotion ControlThe Self-reported Proportion of Condom-protected Acts of Vaginal Intercourse in the Past 3 Months12 mo Steady partners0.555 proportion of actsStandard Error 0.022
Health Promotion ControlThe Self-reported Proportion of Condom-protected Acts of Vaginal Intercourse in the Past 3 MonthsBaseline Steady partners0.516 proportion of actsStandard Error 0.022
Health Promotion ControlThe Self-reported Proportion of Condom-protected Acts of Vaginal Intercourse in the Past 3 Months6 mo Casual partners0.685 proportion of actsStandard Error 0.029
Health Promotion ControlThe Self-reported Proportion of Condom-protected Acts of Vaginal Intercourse in the Past 3 MonthsBaseline Casual partners0.665 proportion of actsStandard Error 0.028
Health Promotion ControlThe Self-reported Proportion of Condom-protected Acts of Vaginal Intercourse in the Past 3 Months12 mo Casual partners0.684 proportion of actsStandard Error 0.03
Health Promotion ControlThe Self-reported Proportion of Condom-protected Acts of Vaginal Intercourse in the Past 3 Months6 mo Steady partners0.549 proportion of actsStandard Error 0.023

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Mar 20, 2026