Advertisement

AIDS and Behavior

, Volume 17, Issue 6, pp 2156–2161 | Cite as

HIV-Negative and HIV-Positive Gay Men’s Attitudes to Medicines, HIV Treatments and Antiretroviral-based Prevention

  • Martin Holt
  • Dean Murphy
  • Denton Callander
  • Jeanne Ellard
  • Marsha Rosengarten
  • Susan Kippax
  • John de Wit
Brief Report

Abstract

We assessed attitudes to medicines, HIV treatments and antiretroviral-based prevention in a national, online survey of 1,041 Australian gay men (88.3 % HIV-negative and 11.7 % HIV-positive). Multivariate analysis of variance was used to identify the effect of HIV status on attitudes. HIV-negative men disagreed with the idea that HIV drugs should be restricted to HIV-positive people. HIV-positive men agreed and HIV-negative men disagreed that taking HIV treatments was straightforward and HIV-negative men were more sceptical about whether HIV treatment or an undetectable viral load prevented HIV transmission. HIV-negative and HIV-positive men had similar attitudes to pre-exposure prophylaxis but divergent views about ‘treatment as prevention’.

Keywords

Attitudes Gay men HIV prevention Pre-exposure prophylaxis Treatment as prevention 

Resumen

En este estudio, se evaluaron las distintas actitudes ante fármacos, tratamientos contra el VIH y la prevención con antirretrovirales a través de una encuesta nacional en línea en la que participaron 1,041 hombres homosexuales australianos (88.3 % con VIH negativo y 11.7 % con VIH positivo). Se utilizó un análisis multivariado de la varianza a fin de identificar el efecto que genera tener o no VIH. Los hombres con VIH negativo se mostraron en desacuerdo con la idea de que el uso de fármacos contra el VIH debe restringirse a aquellas personas infectadas con el virus. Por otra parte, los hombres con VIH positivo concordaron en que la administración de tratamientos contra el VIH es sencilla, mientras que el grupo con VIH negativo se mostró en desacuerdo. Estos últimos, resultaron más escépticos a la hora de precisar si el tratamiento contra el VIH o la administración de una concentración vírica indetectable previenen la transmisión del virus. Ambos grupos expresaron actitudes similares ante la profilaxis previa a la exposición, pero emitieron opiniones divergentes sobre el “tratamiento preventivo”.

Notes

Acknowledgments

Thanks to all the survey participants. This study was supported by a University of New South Wales GoldStar award. The National Centre in HIV Social Research is supported by the Australian Government Department of Health and Ageing.

References

  1. 1.
    Cohen MS, Chen YQ, McCauley M, Gamble T, Hosseinipour MC, Kumarasamy N, et al. Prevention of HIV-1 infection with early antiretroviral therapy. N Engl J Med. 2011;365(6):493–505.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Grant RM, Lama JR, Anderson PL, McMahan V, Liu AY, Vargas L, et al. Preexposure chemoprophylaxis for HIV prevention in men who have sex with men. N Engl J Med. 2010;363:2587–99.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Montaner JSG. Treatment as prevention—a double hat-trick. Lancet. 2011;378(9787):208–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Editorial. HIV treatment as prevention—it works. Lancet. 2011;377(9779):1719.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dieffenbach CW, Fauci AS. Universal voluntary testing and treatment for prevention of HIV transmission. JAMA. 2009;301(22):2380–2.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Imrie J, Elford J, Kippax S, Hart GJ. Biomedical HIV prevention and social science. Lancet. 2007;370(9581):10–1.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Editorial. Treatment as prevention for HIV. Lancet Infect Dis. 2011;11(9):651.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    van de Laar MJ, Pharris A. Treatment as prevention: will it work? Euro Surveill. 2011;16(48):2–4.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Holt M, Murphy DA, Callander D, Ellard J, Rosengarten M, Kippax SC, et al. Willingness to use HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis and the likelihood of decreased condom use are both associated with unprotected anal intercourse and the perceived likelihood of becoming HIV positive among Australian gay and bisexual men. Sex Transm Infect. 2012;88:258–63.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Van de Ven P, Crawford J, Kippax S, Knox S, Prestage G. A scale of optimism–scepticism in the context of HIV treatments. AIDS Care. 2000;12(2):171–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Holt M, Mao L, Prestage G, Zablotska I, De Wit J. Gay Community Periodic Surveys: National Report 2010. Sydney: National Centre in HIV Social Research, The University of New South Wales; 2011.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Australasian Society for HIV Medicine. HHS guidelines for the use of antiretroviral agents in HIV-1-infected adults and adolescents (March 28, 2012) with Australian commentary. Sydney: Australasian Society for HIV Medicine; 2012.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Martin Holt
    • 1
  • Dean Murphy
    • 1
    • 2
  • Denton Callander
    • 1
  • Jeanne Ellard
    • 1
  • Marsha Rosengarten
    • 1
    • 3
  • Susan Kippax
    • 4
  • John de Wit
    • 1
    • 5
  1. 1.National Centre in HIV Social ResearchThe University of New South WalesSydneyAustralia
  2. 2.Australian Federation of AIDS OrganisationsSydneyAustralia
  3. 3.Department of Sociology, GoldsmithsUniversity of LondonLondonUK
  4. 4.Social Policy Research CentreThe University of New South WalesSydneyAustralia
  5. 5.Department of Social and Organizational PsychologyUtrecht UniversityUtrechtThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations