AIDS and Behavior

, Volume 17, Issue 7, pp 2416–2425 | Cite as

Patterns and Predictors of Multiple Sexual Partnerships Among Newly Arrived Latino Migrant Men

  • Meghan D. Althoff
  • Colin Anderson-Smits
  • Stephanie Kovacs
  • Oscar Salinas
  • John Hembling
  • Norine Schmidt
  • Patricia Kissinger
Original Paper


Multiple sexual partnerships (MSP), both concurrent and serial short gap, are thought to increase the risk of HIV and sexually transmitted infection (STI) acquisition and transmission. In this study we evaluate potential individual and environmental risk factors for engaging in MSP in a cohort of newly arrived Latino migrant men (LMM) in New Orleans, LA, USA. Participants were surveyed at three time points over a nine-month period to examine factors associated with MSP. Of the 113 men, 32.5 % reported ever MSP. In 290 observations, 19.5 % of men had concurrent, and 15.0 % had serial short gap partnerships in at least one interviews. Substance was associated with MSP, OR (95 % CI) 2.00 (1.16, 3.45) whereas belonging to a community organization was found to be protective, OR 0.32 (0.17, 0.59). Interventions to reduce substance use and promote social connection are needed to prevent a potential HIV/STI epidemic in this population.


HIV Latino Longitudinal analysis Migrant Sexual concurrency STI 


Múltiples parejas sexuales (MPS), tanto las presentes y sucesivas de un espacio corto, se piensa que aumenta el riesgo de transmisión y adquisición de VIH y de otras enfermedades de transmisión sexual (ETS). En este estudio se evalúa el potencial individual y ambiental de los factores de riesgo en el ejercicio de MPS de una muestra de hombres latinos migrantes (LMM) recién llegados a Nueva Orleans, LA, EE.UU. Los participantes fueron encuestados en tres momentos durante un período de nueve meses para examinar los factores asociados con el ejercicio de MPS. De los 113 hombres, 32,5 % reportaron haber ejercido MPS. En 290 observaciones, el 19,5 % de los hombres tenían parejas sexuales presentes, y el 15,0 % tenían parejas sexuales sucesivas de un espacio corto en al menos una entrevista. El consumo de sustancias incrementó la probabilidad de ejercer MPS, OR (IC del 95 %) 2,00 (1,16–3,45), mientras que pertenecer a una organización de la comunidad se encontró que tenía un efecto protector, OR 0,32 (0,17, 0,59). Las intervenciones para reducir el consumo de sustancias y promover la conexión social son necesarias para prevenir una potencial epidemia de VIH/ITS en esta población.


  1. 1.
    Adimora AA, Schoenbach VJ, Doherty IA. Concurrent sexual partnerships among men in the United States. Am J Public Health. 2007;97(12):2230–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Paz-Bailey G, Teran S, Levine W, Markowitz LE. Syphilis outbreak among Hispanic immigrants in Decatur, Alabama: association with commercial sex. Sex Transm Dis. 2004;31(1):20–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    CDC. 2003 STD surveillance report. Atlanta: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; 2004.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Persichino J, Ibarra L. HIV and Latino migrant workers in the USA. Ethnic Racial Stud. 2012;35(1):120–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Parrado EA, Flippen CA. Migration and sexuality: a comparison of Mexicans in sending and receiving communities. J Soc Issues. 2010;66(1):175–95.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Pulerwitz J, Izazola-Licea JA, Gortmaker SL. Extrarelational sex among Mexican men and their partners’ risk of HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases. Am J Public Health. 2001;91(10):1650–2.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Organista K, Organista PB, Bola JR, de Alba GJE, Morán MAC, Carrillo LEU. Survey of condom-related beliefs, behaviors, and perceived social norms in Mexican migrant laborers. J Community Health. 1997;22(3):185–98.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Viadro C, Earp J. The sexual behavior of married Mexican immigrant men in North Carolina. Soc Sci Med. 2000;50:723–35.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Davis BSG, Winters P. Domestic and international migration from rural Mexico: disaggregating the effects of network structure and composition. Popul Stud. 2002;56(3):291–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Alaniz M. Migration, acculturation, displacement: migratory workers and “substance abuse”. Subst Use Misuse. 2002;37(8–10):1253–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Borges G, Medina-Mora ME, Orozco R, Fleiz C, Cherpitel C, Breslau J. The Mexican migration to the United States and substance use in northern Mexico. Addiction. 2009;104(4):603–11.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Parrado E, Flippen C, McQuiston C. Use of commercial sex workers among Hispanic migrants in North Carolina: implications for the spread of HIV. Perspect Sex Reprod Health. 2004;36(4):150–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kissinger P, Liddon N, Schmidt N, Curtin E, Salinas O, Narvaez A. HIV/STI Risk behaviors among Latino migrant workers in New Orleans post-Hurricane Katrina disaster. Sex Transm Dis. 2008;35(11):924–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Sena AC, Hammer JP, Wilson K, Zeveloff A, Gamble J. Feasibility and acceptability of door-to-door rapid HIV testing among Latino immigrants and their HIV risk factors in North Carolina. AIDS Patient Care STDS. 2010;24(3):165–73.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Galvan FH, Ortiz DJ, Martinez V, Bing EG. The use of female commercial sex workers’ services by Latino day laborers. Hisp J Behav Sci. 2009;31(4):553–75.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Denner J, Organista KC, Dupree JD, Thrush G. Predictors of HIV transmission among migrant and marginally housed Latinos. AIDS Behav. 2005;9(2):201–10.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Caballero-Hoyos R, Torres-Lopez T, Pineda-Lucatero A, Navarro-Nunez C, Fosados R, Valente TW. Between tradition and change: condom use with primary sexual partners among Mexican migrants. AIDS Behav. 2008;12(4):561–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Aral SO. Partner concurrency and the STD/HIV epidemic. Curr Infect Dis Rep. 2010;12(2):134–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    UNAIDS Reference Group. HIV: consensus indicators are needed for concurrency. Lancet. 2010;375(9715):621–2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Potterat JJ, Zimmerman-Rogers H, Muth SQ, Rothenberg RB, Green DL, Taylor JE, et al. Chlamydia transmission: concurrency, reproduction number, and the epidemic trajectory. Am J Epidemiol. 1999;150(12):1331–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Koumans EH, Farley TA, Gibson JJ, Langley C, Ross MW, McFarlane M, et al. Characteristics of persons with syphilis in areas of persisting syphilis in the United States: sustained transmission associated with concurrent partnerships. Sex Transm Dis. 2001;28(9):497–503.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Mah TL, Shelton JD. Concurrency revisited: increasing and compelling epidemiological evidence. J Int AIDS Soc. 2011;14:33.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Morris M, Kretzschmar M. Concurrent partnerships and transmission dynamics in networks. Soc Netw. 1995;17:299–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Morris M, Kretzschmar M. Concurrent partnerships and the spread of HIV. AIDS. 1997;11(5):641–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Javanbakht M, Gorbach PM, Amani B, Walker S, Cranston RD, Datta SD, et al. Concurrency, sex partner risk, and high-risk human papillomavirus infection among African American, Asian, and Hispanic women. Sex Transm Dis. 2010;37(2):68–74.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Chen MI, Ghani AC, Edmunds J. Mind the gap: the role of time between sex with two consecutive partners on the transmission dynamics of gonorrhea. Sex Transm Dis. 2008;35(5):435–44.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Foxman B, Newman M, Percha B, Holmes KK, Aral SO. Measures of sexual partnerships: lengths, gaps, overlaps, and sexually transmitted infection. Sex Transm Dis. 2006;33(4):209–14.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Kraut-Becher JR, Aral SO. Gap length: an important factor in sexually transmitted disease transmission. Sex Transm Dis. 2003;30(3):221–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Eaton JW, Hallett TB, Garnett GP. Concurrent sexual partnerships and primary HIV infection: a critical interaction. AIDS Behav. 2011;15(4):687–92.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Pilcher CD, Tien HC, Eron JJ Jr, Vernazza PL, Leu SY, Stewart PW, et al. Brief but efficient: acute HIV infection and the sexual transmission of HIV. J Infect Dis. 2004;189(10):1785–92.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Boily MC, Alary M, Baggaley RF. Neglected issues and hypotheses regarding the impact of sexual concurrency on HIV and sexually transmitted infections. AIDS Behav. 2011;16:304–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Lurie MN, Rosenthal S. The concurrency hypothesis in Sub-Saharan Africa: convincing empirical evidence is still lacking. response to Mah and Halperin, Epstein, and Morris. AIDS Behav. 2010;14(1):34.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Shelton JD. A tale of two-component generalised HIV epidemics. Lancet. 2010;375(9719):964–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Aral SO, Holmes KK. Epidemiology of sexually transmitted disease. In: Holmes KK, Sparling, PF et al., editors. New York: McGraw Hill; 1984.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Daker-White G, Barlow D. Heterosexual gonorrhoea at St Thomas’-II: sexual behaviour and sources of infection. Int J STD AIDS. 1997;8(2):102–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Van Duynhoven YT, van de Laar MJ, Schop WA, Mouton JW, van der Meijden WI, Sprenger MJ. Different demographic and sexual correlates for chlamydial infection and gonorrhoea in Rotterdam. Int J Epidemiol. 1997;26(6):1373–85.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Wenzel SL, Rhoades H, Hsu HT, Golinelli D, Tucker JS, Kennedy DP, et al. Behavioral health and social normative influence: correlates of concurrent sexual partnering among heterosexually-active homeless men. AIDS Behav. 2011.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Senn TE, Carey MP, Vanable PA, Coury-Doniger P, Urban M. Sexual partner concurrency among STI clinic patients with a steady partner: correlates and associations with condom use. Sex Transm Infect. 2009;85(5):343–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    MMWR. Primary and secondary syphilis—Jefferson county, Alabama, 2002–2007. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2009;58(17):463–7.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Anderson-Smits C, Kovacs S, Salinas O, Hembling J, Schmidt N, Kissinger P, editors. Sexual concurrency among Latino migrant men in New Orleans. Quebec City: ISSTDR; 2011.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Kasarda JD, Janowitz M. Community attachment in mass society. Am Sociol Rev. 1974;39(3):328–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Parrado EA, Flippen C. Community attachment, neighborhood context, and sex worker use among Hispanic migrants in Durham, North Carolina, USA. Soc Sci Med. 2010;70(7):1059–69.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Montealegre JR, Risser JM, Selwyn BJ, McCurdy SA, Sabin K. Prevalence of HIV risk behaviors among undocumented Central American immigrant women in Houston, Texas. AIDS Behav. 2012;16(6):1670–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Mills J, Burton N, Schmidt N, Salinas O, Hembling J, Aran A, et al. Sex and drug risk behavior pre- and post-emigration among latino migrant men in Post-Hurricane Katrina New Orleans. J Immigr Minor Health. 2012; 20120606 (1557–1920 (Electronic)).Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Bureau USC. Population by race and Hispanic or Latino Origin, for the United States, regions, divisions, and states, and for Puerto Rico: 2000. Illinois: US Census Bureau; 2001.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Elliott J, Ionescu M. Postwar immigration to the deep south triad: what can a peripheral region tell us about immigrant settlement and employment? Sociol Spectr. 2003;23(2):159–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Kissinger P, Kovacs S, Anderson-Smits C, Schmidt N, Salinas O, Hembling J, et al. Patterns and predictors of HIV/STI risk among Latino Migrant men in a new receiving community. AIDS Behav. 2011;54(5):366–74.Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Behling O, Law K. Translating questionnaires and other research instruments: problems and solutions. London: Allen and Unwin; 2000.Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    de la Puente M, Pan Y, Rose D. An overview of a proposed census bureau guidelines for the translation of data collection instruments and supporting materials. Washington DC: U.S. Census Bureau; 2003.Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Morris M. Network epidemiology: a handbook for survey design and data collection. In: Morris M, editor. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2004.Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Le Pont FO, Pech N, Boelle P-Y. The Acsag I. A new scale for measuring dynamic patterns of sexual partnership and concurrency: application to three French Caribbean regions. Sex Transm Dis. 2003;30(1):6–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Flom PL, Friedman SR, Kottiri BJ, Neaigus A, Curtis R, Des Jarlais DC, et al. Stigmatized drug use, sexual partner concurrency, and other sex risk network and behavior characteristics of 18- to 24-year-old youth in a high-risk neighborhood. Sex Transm Dis. 2001;28(10):598–607.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    NIAAA. NIAAA council approves definition of binge drinking. In: Services DoHaH, editor. Staten Island: Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes; 2004.Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Radloff L. The CES-D scale: a self-report depression scale for research in the general population. Appl Psychol Meas. 1977;1:385–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    UNAIDS. UNAIDS report on the global AIDS epidemic 2010. UNAIDS, Geneva. 2010. Accessed 24 Aug 2012.
  56. 56.
    Rubalcava LN, Teruel GM, Thomas D, Goldman N. The healthy migrant effect: new findings from the Mexican family life survey. Am J Public Health. 2008;98(1):78–84.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Tanser F, Barnighausen T, Hund L, Garnett GP, McGrath N, Newell ML. Effect of concurrent sexual partnerships on rate of new HIV infections in a high-prevalence, rural South African population: a cohort study. Lancet. 2011;378(9787):247–55.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Enns Ea Fau - Brandeau ML, Brandeau Ml Fau - Igeme TK, Igeme Tk Fau - Bendavid E, Bendavid E, Sawers L Fau - Isaac AG, Isaac Ag Fau - Stillwaggon E, et al. Assessing effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of concurrency reduction for HIV prevention HIV and concurrent sexual partnerships: modelling the role of coital dilution. Int J STD AIDS. 2011; 20111014 DCOM–20120208 20110930 DCOM–20111115 (1758–1052 (electronic)).Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Doherty IA, Minnis A, Auerswald CL, Adimora AA, Padian NS. Concurrent partnerships among adolescents in a Latino community: the Mission District of San Francisco, California. Sex Transm Dis. 2007;34(7):437–43.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Maughan-Brown B, Venkataramani AS. Measuring concurrent partnerships: potential for underestimation in UNAIDS recommended method. AIDS. 2011;25(12):1549–51.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Heckathorn D. Respondent-driven sampling: a new approach to the study of hidden populations. Soc Probl. 1997;44(2):174–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Heckathorn D. Respondent-driven sampling II: deriving valid population estimates from chain-referral samples of hidden populations. Soc Probl. 2002;49(1):11–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Burt RD, Hagan H, Sabin K, Thiede H. Evaluating respondent-driven sampling in a major metropolitan area: comparing injection drug users in the 2005 Seattle area national HIV behavioral surveillance system survey with participants in the RAVEN and Kiwi studies. Ann Epidemiol. 2010;20(2):159–67.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    McCreesh N, Frost SD, Seeley J, Katongole J, Tarsh MN, Ndunguse R, et al. Evaluation of respondent-driven sampling. Epidemiology. 2012;23(1):138–47.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Meghan D. Althoff
    • 1
    • 2
  • Colin Anderson-Smits
    • 1
  • Stephanie Kovacs
    • 1
  • Oscar Salinas
    • 1
  • John Hembling
    • 1
  • Norine Schmidt
    • 1
  • Patricia Kissinger
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Epidemiology SL-18School of Public Health and Tropical Medicine, Tulane UniversityNew OrleansUSA
  2. 2.School of Medicine, Tulane UniversityNew OrleansUSA

Personalised recommendations