“Here’s What I’d Do …”: Condom Promotion Strategies Proposed by High-Risk Women in Anchorage, Alaska

Abstract

Women drug users are at significant risk of sexually transmitted HIV; however, interventions aimed at increasing condom use by this population have been relatively ineffective. The authors conducted a series of focus groups with 17 current and former drug-using women to identify (a) reasons for using versus not using condoms, (b) intervention strategies they believed would be most effective at increasing condom use, and (c) previous ineffective intervention strategies. Risk of HIV, sexually transmitted diseases, and pregnancy was the main reason given for using condoms. Many factors were identified that limited condom use, including lack of availability, substance use, and cost. Participants enthusiastically endorsed condom availability and AIDS awareness interventions, and suggested that no intervention was a waste of money. The authors discuss the limitations of the suggested interventions and recommend additional research to evaluate the efficacy of these strategies.

Conceptualizing the influence of social agents of behavior change: A meta-analysis of the effectiveness of HIV-prevention interventionists for different groups.

“…For instance, Kalichman, Williams, and Nachimson (1999; see also Kalichman, Kelly, Hunter, Murphy, & Tyler, 1993) reported positive results from a brief behavioral-skills-building intervention in which African American females with expertise in public health education and prevention of STIs (Sexually Transmitted Infections) were selected to reach other African American females (see also Bichsel, 1998; Dalton, 2001; Dyche & Zayas, 1995; Frost-Pineda, Van Susteren, & Gold, 2004; Nikelly, 1997). However, in the opinion of a sample of Alaskan women at risk for HIV infection, to be effective, outreach workers need not be similar to targets with respect to race, gender, or age, but do need to be pleasant and have similar life experiences to the targets (Fenaughty & Namyniuk, 2004). In addition, in a study with teens by Jemmott et al (1998), matching the ethnicity of leaders and the target youth was unrelated to the effectiveness of interventions for African American youth, even though matching age is reportedly important for teen audiences (Kalafat & Elias, 1994; Milburn, 1995; Myrick & Folk, 1991; Myrick, 1996; Ozer, Weinstein, Maslack, & Siegel, 1997; Philliber, 1999; Reeder, Pryor, & Harsh, 1997; Stuart, Waalen, & Haelstromm, 2003; Tindal & Salmon-White, 1990; Wolf, Bond, & Tawfik, 2000; but see Department for Education and Skills, U.K., 2000).…”

A Cognitive Analysis of College Students’ Explanations for Engaging in Unprotected Sexual Intercourse

“…These factors are categorized across many dimensions, including drug and alcohol use (Poulin & Graham, 2001; Roberts & Kennedy, 2006), relationship/intimacy factors (Aalsma, Fortenberry, Sayegh, & Orr, 2006; Civic, 1999; Prince & Bernard, 1998), pleasure and performance issues (Crosby, Graham, Yarber, & Sanders, 2004), cultural beliefs about condom use and transmission of infection (Braithwaite & Thomas, 2001; Duncan, Harrison, Toldson, Malaka, & Sithole, 2005), low perceived susceptibility (Civic, 2000; Opt & Loffredo, 2004), lack of preparation (van Empelen & Kok, 2008) and poor access or lack of availability (Fenaughty & Namyniuk, 2004; Sneed et al, 2001). …”

Condom Use Self-Efficacy among Young Adult Ecstasy Users

“…We were somewhat surprised to discover that almost all of the substance userelated measures we examined were unrelated to condom use self-efficacy, especially since so many previous studies have shown a link between drug use and condom use, attitudes toward condom use, and condom use self-efficacy (see, for example, Elwood & Vega, 2005;Fenaughty & Namyniuk, 2004;Tucker, Wenzel, Elliott, Marshall, & Williamson, 2004). Nevertheless, one such measure-previously having been in a drug treatment program-was found to be a significant predictor of condom use self-efficacy in this population of young adult users of ecstasy.…”