Sexual & reproductive healthcare : official journal of the Swedish Association of Midwives · 2021
Prevalence and correlates of having sexual and reproductive health priorities met by HIV providers among women living with HIV in a Canadian setting.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Zhang L J, Shannon K, Tibashoboka D, Ogilvie G, Pick N, Kestler M, Logie C, Udall B, Braschel M, Deering K N
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To: (1) describe the prevalence of key reproductive health outcomes (e.g., pregnancy, unintended pregnancy; abortion); and (2) examine social-structural correlates, including HIV stigma, of having key sexual and reproductive health (SRH) priorities met by participants' primary HIV provider, among women living with HIV.
METHODS: Data were drawn from a longitudinal community-based open cohort (SHAWNA) of women living with HIV. The associations between social-structural factors and two outcomes representing having SRH priorities met by HIV providers ('being comfortable discussing sexual health [SH] and/or getting a Papanicolaou test' and 'being comfortable discussing reproductive health [RH] and/or pregnancy needs') were analyzed using bivariate and multivariable logistic regression models with generalized estimating equations for repeated measures over time. Adjusted odds ratios (AOR) and 95% confidence intervals [95% CIs] are reported.
RESULTS: Of 314 participants, 77.1% reported having SH priorities met while 64.7% reported having RH priorities met by their primary HIV provider at baseline. In multivariable analysis, having SH priorities met was inversely associated with: sexual minority identity (AOR: 0.59, 95% CI: 0.37-0.94), gender minority identity (AOR: 0.52, 95% CI: 0.29-0.95) and recent verbal or physical violence related to HIV status (AOR: 0.55, 95% CI: 0.31-0.97) and positively associated with recently accessing women-centred services (Oak Tree Clinic) (AOR: 4.25, 95% CI: 2.20-8.23). Having RH priorities met was inversely associated with: sexual minority identity (AOR: 0.56, 95% CI: 0.40-0.79), gender minority identity (AOR: 0.45, 95% CI: 0.25-0.81) and being born in Canada (AOR: 0.29, 95% CI: 0.15-0.56) and positively associated with recently accessing women-centred services (AOR: 1.81, 95% CI: 1.29-2.53) and a history of pregnancy (AOR: 2.25, 95% CI: 1.47-3.44).
CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that there remain unmet priorities for safe SRH care and practice among women living with HIV, and in particular, for women living with HIV with sexual and/or gender minority identity and those who experience enacted HIV stigma. HIV providers should create safe, non-judgmental environments to facilitate discussions on SRH. These environments should be affirming of all sexual orientations and gender identities, culturally safe, culturally humble and use trauma-informed approaches.
METHODS: Data were drawn from a longitudinal community-based open cohort (SHAWNA) of women living with HIV. The associations between social-structural factors and two outcomes representing having SRH priorities met by HIV providers ('being comfortable discussing sexual health [SH] and/or getting a Papanicolaou test' and 'being comfortable discussing reproductive health [RH] and/or pregnancy needs') were analyzed using bivariate and multivariable logistic regression models with generalized estimating equations for repeated measures over time. Adjusted odds ratios (AOR) and 95% confidence intervals [95% CIs] are reported.
RESULTS: Of 314 participants, 77.1% reported having SH priorities met while 64.7% reported having RH priorities met by their primary HIV provider at baseline. In multivariable analysis, having SH priorities met was inversely associated with: sexual minority identity (AOR: 0.59, 95% CI: 0.37-0.94), gender minority identity (AOR: 0.52, 95% CI: 0.29-0.95) and recent verbal or physical violence related to HIV status (AOR: 0.55, 95% CI: 0.31-0.97) and positively associated with recently accessing women-centred services (Oak Tree Clinic) (AOR: 4.25, 95% CI: 2.20-8.23). Having RH priorities met was inversely associated with: sexual minority identity (AOR: 0.56, 95% CI: 0.40-0.79), gender minority identity (AOR: 0.45, 95% CI: 0.25-0.81) and being born in Canada (AOR: 0.29, 95% CI: 0.15-0.56) and positively associated with recently accessing women-centred services (AOR: 1.81, 95% CI: 1.29-2.53) and a history of pregnancy (AOR: 2.25, 95% CI: 1.47-3.44).
CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that there remain unmet priorities for safe SRH care and practice among women living with HIV, and in particular, for women living with HIV with sexual and/or gender minority identity and those who experience enacted HIV stigma. HIV providers should create safe, non-judgmental environments to facilitate discussions on SRH. These environments should be affirming of all sexual orientations and gender identities, culturally safe, culturally humble and use trauma-informed approaches.