Search

People living with HIV (PLHIV) report lower health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) than HIV-negative people. HIV stigma may contribute to this. We explored the association between HIV stigma and HRQoL among PLHIV. We used cross-sectional data from 3991 randomly selected PLHIV who were surveyed in 2017-2018 for HPTN 071 (PopART), a cluster randomised trial in Zambia and South Africa. Participants were 18-44 years, had laboratory-confirmed HIV infection, and knew their status. HRQoL was measured using the EuroQol-5-dimensions-5-levels (EQ-5D-5L) questionnaire. Stigma outcomes included: internalised stigma, stigma experienced in the community, and stigma experienced in healthcare settings. Associations were examined using logistic regression. Participants who had experienced community stigma (n = 693/3991) had higher odds of reporting problems in at least one HRQoL domain, compared to those who had not (adjusted odds ratio, aOR: 1.51, 95% confidence interval, 95% Cl: 1.16-1.98, p = 0.002). Having experienced internalised stigma was also associated with reporting problems in at least one HRQoL domain (n = 552/3991, aOR: 1.98, 95% CI: 1.54-2.54, p < 0.001). However, having experienced stigma in a healthcare setting was less common (n = 158/3991) and not associated with HRQoL (aOR: 1.04, 95% CI: 0.68-1.58, p = 0.850). A stronger focus on interventions for internalised stigma and stigma experienced in the community is required., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: The impact of HIV stigma on viral suppression among people living with HIV (PLHIV) is not well characterized., Setting: Twenty-one communities in Zambia and South Africa, nested within the HPTN 071 (PopART) trial., Methods: We analyzed data on viral suppression (<400 copies HIV RNA/mL) among 5662 laboratory-confirmed PLHIV aged 18-44 years who were randomly sampled within the PopART trial population cohort 24 months after enrolment (PC24). We collected data on experiences and internalization of stigma from those PLHIV who self-reported their HIV status (n = 3963/5662) and data on perceptions of stigma from a 20% random sample of all PLHIV (n = 1154/5662). We also measured stigma at the community-level among PLHIV, community members, and health workers. We analyzed the association between individual- and community-level measures of HIV stigma and viral suppression among PLHIV, adjusting for confounding., Results: Of all 5662 PLHIV, 69.1% were virally suppressed at PC24. Viral suppression was highest among those 3963 cohort participants who self-reported living with HIV and were on ART (88.3%), and lower among those not on treatment (37.5%). Self-identifying PLHIV who reported internalized stigma were less likely to be virally suppressed (75.0%) than those who did not (80.7%; adjusted risk ratio, 0.94 95% CI: 0.89 to 0.98). Experiences, perceptions, and community-level measures of stigma were not associated with viral suppression., Conclusion: Internalized stigma among PLHIV was associated with a lower level of viral suppression; other dimensions of stigma were not. Stigma reduction approaches that address internalized stigma should be an integral component of efforts to control the HIV epidemic.

Objectives: To assess the impact of a combination HIV prevention intervention including universal testing and treatment (UTT) on HIV stigma among people living with HIV, and among community members and health workers not living with HIV., Design: This HIV stigma study was nested in the HPTN 071 (PopART) trial, a three-arm cluster randomised trial conducted between 2013 and 2018 in 21 urban/peri-urban communities (12 in Zambia and nine in South Africa)., Methods: Using an adjusted two-stage cluster-level analysis, controlling for baseline imbalances, we compared multiple domains of stigma between the trial arms at 36 months. Different domains of stigma were measured among three cohorts recruited across all study communities: 4178 randomly sampled adults aged 18-44 who were living with HIV, and 3487 randomly sampled adults and 1224 health workers who did not self-report living with HIV., Results: Prevalence of any stigma reported by people living with HIV at 36 months was 20.2% in arm A, 26.1% in arm B, and 19.1% in arm C (adjusted prevalence ratio, A vs. C 1.01 95% CI 0.49-2.08, B vs. C 1.34 95% CI 0.65-2.75). There were no significant differences between arms in any other measures of stigma across all three cohorts. All measures of stigma reduced over time (0.2--4.1% reduction between rounds) with most reductions statistically significant., Conclusion: We found little evidence that UTT either increased or decreased HIV stigma measured among people living with HIV, or among community members or health workers not living with HIV. Stigma reduced over time, but slowly. CLINICALTRIALS., Gov Number: NCT01900977.

Objectives: Adherence to antiretroviral therapy (ART) leads to viral suppression for people living with HIV (PLHIV) and is critical for both individual health and reducing onward HIV transmission. HIV stigma is a risk factor that can undermine adherence. We explored the association between HIV stigma and self-reported ART adherence among PLHIV in 21 communities in the HPTN 071 (PopART) trial in Zambia and the Western Cape of South Africa., Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of baseline data collected between 2013 and 2015, before the roll-out of trial interventions. Questionnaires were conducted, and consenting participants provided a blood sample for HIV testing. Poor adherence was defined as self-report of not currently taking ART, missing pills over the previous 7 days or stopping treatment in the previous 12 months. Stigma was categorised into three domains: community, health setting and internalised stigma. Multivariable logistic regression was used for analysis., Results: Among 2020 PLHIV self-reporting ever taking ART, 1888 (93%) were included in multivariable analysis. Poor ART adherence was reported by 15.8% (n = 320) of participants, and 25.7% (n = 519) reported experiencing community stigma, 21.5% (n = 434) internalised stigma, and 5.7% (n = 152) health setting stigma. PLHIV who self-reported previous experiences of community and internalised stigma more commonly reported poor ART adherence than those who did not (aOR 1.63, 95% CI 1.21 -2.19, P = 0.001 and aOR 1.31, 95% CI 0.96-1.79, P = 0.09)., Conclusions: HIV stigma was associated with poor ART adherence. Roll-out of universal treatment will see an increasingly high proportion of PLHIV initiated on ART. Addressing HIV stigma could make an important contribution to supporting lifelong ART adherence., (© 2020 The Authors Tropical Medicine & International Health Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Door-to-door distribution of HIV self-testing kits (HIVST) has the potential to increase uptake of HIV testing services (HTS). However, very few studies have explored the social response to and implications of door-to-door including secondary distribution of HIVST on household relations and the ability of individuals to self-test with or without supervision within households., Methods: A CRT of HIVST distribution was nested within the HPTN 071 (PopART) trial, in four Zambian communities randomised to receive the PopART intervention. The nested HIVST trial aimed to increase knowledge of HIV status at population level. Between February 1 and April 30, 2017, 66 zones (clusters) within these four communities were randomly allocated to either the PopART standard of care door-to-door HTS (33 clusters) or PopART standard of care door-to-door HTS plus oral HIVST (33 clusters). In clusters randomised to HIVST, trained Community HIV care provider (CHiPs) visited households and offered individuals aged ≥ 16 and eligible for an offer of HTS the choice of HIV testing using HIVST or routine door-to-door HTS (finger-prick RDT). To document participants' experiences with HIVST, Interviews (n = 40), observations (n = 22) and group discussions (n = 91) with household members and CHiPs were conducted. Data were coded using Atlas.ti 7 and analysed thematically., Results: The usage and storage of HIVST kits was facilitated by familiarity with and trust in CHiPs, the novelty of HIVST, and demonstrations and supervision provided by CHiPs. Door-to-door distribution of HIVST kits was appreciated for being novel, convenient, private, empowering, autonomous and easy-to-use. Literacy and age influenced accurate usage of HIVST kits. The novelty of using oral fluids to test for HIV raised questions, some anxiety and doubts about the accuracy of HIVST. Although HIVST protected participants from experiencing clinic-based stigma, it did not address self-stigma. Within households, HIVST usually strengthened relationships but, amongst couples, there were a few reports of social harms., Conclusion: Door-to-door distribution of HIVST as a choice for how to HIV test is appreciated at community level and provides an important testing option in the sub-Saharan context. However, it should be accompanied by counselling to manage social harms and by supporting those testing HIV-positive to link to care.

Stigma and judgment by health workers toward people living with HIV (PLHIV) and key populations can undermine the uptake of HIV services. In 2014, we recruited health workers delivering HIV services from 21 urban communities in South Africa and Zambia participating in the first year of the HPTN 071 (PopART) cluster-randomized trial. We analyzed self-reported levels of stigma and judgment toward (1) PLHIV, (2) women who sell sex, (3) men who have sex with men (MSM), and (4) young women who become pregnant before marriage. Using logistic regression, we compared responses between three health worker cadres and explored risk factors for stigmatizing attitudes. Highest levels of stigma and judgment were in relation to women who sell sex and MSM, especially in Zambia. Heath workers did not generally think that clients should be denied services, although this was reported slightly more commonly by community health workers. Higher education levels were associated with lower judgmental beliefs, whereas higher perceptions of coworker stigmatizing behaviors toward PLHIV and each key population were associated with holding judgmental beliefs. Training experience was not associated with judgmental attitudes for any of the key populations. Our findings confirm a high prevalence of judgmental attitudes toward key population groups but lower levels in relation to PLHIV, among all cadres of health workers in both countries. Planning and implementing targeted stigma reduction interventions within health settings are critical to meet the needs of vulnerable populations that face more stigmatizing attitudes from health workers.

Introduction: Integrating standardized measures of HIV stigma and discrimination into research studies of emerging HIV prevention approaches could enhance uptake and retention of these approaches, and care and treatment for people living with HIV (PLHIV), by informing stigma mitigation strategies. We sought to develop a succinct set of measures to capture key domains of stigma for use in research on HIV prevention technologies., Methods: From 2013 to 2015, we collected baseline data on HIV stigma from three populations (PLHIV (N = 4053), community members (N = 5782) and health workers (N = 1560)) in 21 study communities in South Africa and Zambia participating in the HPTN 071 (PopART) cluster-randomized trial. Forty questions were adapted from a harmonized set of measures developed in a consultative, global process. Informed by theory and factor analysis, we developed seven scales, with values ranging from 0 to 3, based on a 4-point agreement Likert, and calculated means to assess different aspects of stigma. Higher means reflected more stigma. We developed two measures capturing percentages of PLHIV who reported experiencing any stigma in communities or healthcare settings in the past 12 months. We validated our measures by examining reliability using Cronbach's alpha and comparing the distribution of responses across characteristics previously associated with HIV stigma., Results: Thirty-five questions ultimately contributed to seven scales and two experience measures. All scales demonstrated acceptable to very good internal consistency. Among PLHIV, a scale captured internalized stigma, and experience measures demonstrated that 22.0% of PLHIV experienced stigma in the community and 7.1% in healthcare settings. Three scales for community members assessed fear and judgement, perceived stigma in the community and perceived stigma in healthcare settings. Similarly, health worker scales assessed fear and judgement, perceived stigma in the community and perceived co-worker stigma in healthcare settings. A higher proportion of community members and health workers reported perceived stigma than the proportion of PLHIV who reported experiences of stigma., Conclusions: We developed novel, valid measures that allowed for triangulation of HIV stigma across three populations in a large-scale study. Such comparisons will illuminate how stigma influences and is influenced by programmatic changes to HIV service delivery over time., (© 2019 The Authors. Journal of the International AIDS Society published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of the International AIDS Society.)

Health workers in 21 government health facilities in Zambia and South Africa linked spatial organisation of HIV services and material items signifying HIV-status (for example, coloured client cards) to the risk of People Living with HIV (PLHIV) 'being seen' or identified by others. Demarcated HIV services, distinctive client flow and associated-items were considered especially distinguishing. Strategies to circumvent any resulting stigma mostly involved PLHIV avoiding and/or reducing contact with services and health workers reducing visibility of PLHIV through alterations to structures, items and systems. HIV spatial organisation and item adjustments, enacting PLHIV-friendly policies and wider stigma reduction initiatives could combined reduce risks of identification and enhance the privacy of health facility space and diminish stigma., (Copyright © 2018 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To describe the prevalence and determinants of HIV stigma in 21 communities in Zambia and South Africa., Design: Analysis of baseline data from the HPTN 071 (PopART) cluster-randomized trial. HIV stigma data came from a random sample of 3859 people living with HIV. Community-level exposures reflecting HIV fears and judgements and perceptions of HIV stigma came from a random sample of community members not living with HIV (n = 5088), and from health workers (HW) (n = 851)., Methods: We calculated the prevalence of internalized stigma, and stigma experienced in the community or in a healthcare setting in the past year. We conducted risk-factor analyses using logistic regression, adjusting for clustering., Results: Internalized stigma (868/3859, prevalence 22.5%) was not associated with sociodemographic characteristics but was less common among those with a longer period since diagnosis (P = 0.043). Stigma experienced in the community (853/3859, 22.1%) was more common among women (P = 0.016), older (P = 0.011) and unmarried (P = 0.009) individuals, those who had disclosed to others (P < 0.001), and those with more lifetime sexual partners (P < 0.001). Stigma experienced in a healthcare setting (280/3859, 7.3%) was more common among women (P = 0.019) and those reporting more lifetime sexual partners (P = 0.001) and higher wealth (P = 0.003). Experienced stigma was more common in clusters wherever community members perceived higher levels of stigma, but was not associated with the beliefs of community members or HW., Conclusion: HIV stigma remains unacceptably high in South Africa and Zambia and may act as barrier to HIV prevention and treatment. Further research is needed to understand its determinants.

Setting: Zambian and South African TB and HIV Reduction (ZAMSTAR) cluster-randomised trial (CRT) communities, 2006-2009., Objectives: To develop TB stigma items, and evaluate changes in them in response to a household intervention aimed at reducing TB transmission and prevalence but not tailored to reduce stigma., Design: TB stigma was measured at baseline and 18 months later among 1826 recently diagnosed TB patients and 1235 adult members of their households across 24 communities; 12 of 24 communities were randomised to receive the household intervention. We estimated the impact of the household intervention on TB stigma using standard CRT analytical methods., Results: Among household members, prevalence of blame and belief in transmission myths fell in both study arms over time: adjusted prevalence ratios (aPRs) comparing the household intervention with the non-household intervention arm were respectively 0.61 (95%CI 0.26-1.44) and 0.77 (95%CI 0.48-1.25) at 18-month follow-up. Among TB patients, at baseline a low percentage experienced social exclusion and poor treatment by health staff and a relatively high percentage reported 'being made fun of', with little change over time. Disclosure of TB status increased over time in both study arms. Internalised stigma was less prevalent in the household arm at both baseline and follow-up, with an aPR of 0.85 (95%CI 0.41-1.76). Variability in stigma levels between countries and across communities was large., Conclusion: Robust TB stigma items were developed. TB stigma was not significantly reduced by the household intervention, although confidence intervals for estimated intervention effects were wide. We suggest that stigma-specific interventions are required to effectively address TB stigma.

Background: Stigma and discrimination related to HIV and key populations at high risk of HIV have the potential to impede the implementation of effective HIV prevention and treatment programmes at scale. Studies measuring the impact of stigma on these programmes are rare. We are conducting an implementation science study of HIV-related stigma in communities and health settings within a large, pragmatic cluster-randomized trial of a universal testing and treatment intervention for HIV prevention in Zambia and South Africa and will assess how stigma affects, and is affected by, implementation of this intervention., Methods/design: A mixed-method evaluation will be nested within HIV prevention trials network (HPTN) 071/PopART (Clinical Trials registration number NCT01900977), a three-arm trial comparing universal door-to-door delivery of HIV testing and referral to prevention and treatment services, accompanied by either an immediate offer of anti-retroviral treatment to people living with HIV regardless of clinical status, or an offer of treatment in-line with national guidelines, with a standard-of-care control arm. The primary outcome of HPTN 071/PopART is HIV incidence measured among a cohort of 52 500 individuals in 21 study clusters. Our evaluation will include integrated quantitative and qualitative data collection and analysis in all trial sites. We will collect quantitative data on indicators of HIV-related stigma over 3 years from large probability samples of community members, health workers and people living with HIV. We will collect qualitative data, including in-depth interviews and observations from members of these same groups sampled purposively. In analysis, we will: (1) compare HIV-related stigma measures between study arms, (2) link data on stigma to measures of the success of implementation of the PopART intervention and (3) explore changes in the dominant drivers and manifestations of stigma in study communities and the health system., Discussion: HIV-related stigma may impede the successful implementation of HIV prevention and treatment programmes. Using a novel study-design nested within a large, community randomized trial we will evaluate the extent to which HIV-related stigma affects and is affected by the implementation of a comprehensive combination HIV prevention intervention including a universal test and treatment approach., (© The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press in association with The London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)