Correlates of Adherence to Combination Antiretroviral Therapy Among Members of HIV-positive Mixed Status Couples

Published in: AIDS Care, v. 14 no. 1, Feb. 2002, p. 105-109

Posted on RAND.org on January 01, 2002

by Glenn Wagner, Robert H. Remien, Alex Carballo-Dieguez, Curtis Dolezal

Read More

Access further information on this document at www.informaworld.com

This article was published outside of RAND. The full text of the article can be found at the link above.

This exploratory study assessed medication adherence and its correlates in HIV-positive members of HIV mixed status couples. Forty couples were interviewed; the HIV-positive participants consisted of 19 gay men, 14 heterosexual men and seven heterosexual women. Mean self-reported adherence (over the past three days) for the whole sample was 95%; the mean adherence rate for gay men (99%) was significantly higher (p < 0.05) than that of heterosexual men (94%) and heterosexual women (87%) based on a ranked transformation of the adherence score. In analyses involving measures rated by the HIV-positive partner, higher adherence was associated with more years of education, greater perceived treatment efficacy, stronger belief that combination therapy is a significant advancement in treatment, and greater knowledge of HIV treatments and consequences of poor adherence. Higher adherence was associated with the HIV-negative partner attributing less risk to unprotected anal/vaginal sex within the couple, while lower adherence was associated with a greater likelihood that the couple engaged in unprotected anal/vaginal sex in the last two months. A larger sample is needed to substantiate these findings.

This report is part of the RAND Corporation external publication series. Many RAND studies are published in peer-reviewed scholarly journals, as chapters in commercial books, or as documents published by other organizations.

The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.