Sexual Relationship Power and Safe Sex Communication Among Partnered Women in the Dominican Republic

Abstract

Introduction: Research is needed to identify influences on safe sex communication among specific culture groups. This study aimed to (1) describe sexual behaviors and indicators of sexual power among partnered Dominican women and (2) identify which of these indicators are significantly associated with safe sex communication. Methodology: Cross-sectional surveys, grounded in the theory of gender and power, were conducted with 100 partnered women at a clinic in southeastern Dominican Republic. Linear regression modeling was used to identify significant associations. Results: Self-efficacy (β = 0.48), total personal monthly income (β = 0.21), and history of sexually transmitted infection (β = 0.19) were significantly associated with higher level of partner safe sex communication. Discussion: Nurse clinicians, educators, and researchers should consider self-efficacy, personal income, and history of sexually transmitted infection when addressing communication in HIV prevention efforts among Dominican women.

Profiles of HIV Risk, Sexual Power, and Decision-Making among Sexual Minority Men of Color Who Engage in Transactional Sex: A Latent Profile Analysis

“…Table 4 presents the mean-level group differences between latent profile groups on indicators of sexual health including HIV knowledge, number of sexual partners in the past 6 months, safe sex behavior: no condom use during sex, and safe sex behavior: drug use during sex, condom use, and drug use during sex. Statistically significant differences were present on HIV knowledge (F [ 4 ] = 1.12, p = 0.05) with those in Profile 1: Low transactional sex and high power , displaying greater mean rates of HIV knowledge compared to other profile groups ( M = 13.44 ± 4.39), and those in Profile 4: High transactional sex and low power having the lowest mean rates of HIV knowledge compared to other profile groups ( M = 10.90 ± 5.06). Statistically significant differences were present on number of sexual partners (F [ 4 ] = 2.05, p = 0.04), with those in Profile 1: Low transactional sex and high power displaying lowest mean rates of number of sexual partners compared to other profile groups ( M = 2.37 ± 7.75), and those in Profile 4: High transactional sex and low power having the highest mean rates of number of sexual partners compared to other profile groups ( M = 17.42 ± 8.01).…”

“…Statistically significant differences were present on HIV knowledge (F [ 4 ] = 1.12, p = 0.05) with those in Profile 1: Low transactional sex and high power , displaying greater mean rates of HIV knowledge compared to other profile groups ( M = 13.44 ± 4.39), and those in Profile 4: High transactional sex and low power having the lowest mean rates of HIV knowledge compared to other profile groups ( M = 10.90 ± 5.06). Statistically significant differences were present on number of sexual partners (F [ 4 ] = 2.05, p = 0.04), with those in Profile 1: Low transactional sex and high power displaying lowest mean rates of number of sexual partners compared to other profile groups ( M = 2.37 ± 7.75), and those in Profile 4: High transactional sex and low power having the highest mean rates of number of sexual partners compared to other profile groups ( M = 17.42 ± 8.01). Similar group differences were also noted on safe sex behavior: no condom use during sex (F [ 4 ] = 2.44, p = 0.04) and safe sex behavior: drug use during sex (F [ 4 ] = 15.96, p < 0.001).…”

“…[10,28]. Responses are collected using a Likert-type scale from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (4). Due to concerns with the internal reliability of the measure during preliminary analyses, factor analysis was conducted on the measure to support the validity of the current sample group.…”

“…Sexual relationship power is the perceived decision-making ability that an individual has concerning the power and control they have within a sexual relationship [3]. Sexual power is linked to an individual's sexual self-efficacy; so increased power, in turn, is linked to the increased likelihood of safer sex behaviors [4]. Conversely, decreased relationship power has been correlated with higher HIV risk [5].…”

“…Although there is literature discussing the relationship between sexual relationship power and HIV risk, existing literature on sexual relationship power, transactional sex, and HIV transmission has primarily addressed women [ 4 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 12 , 15 , 27 ]. Consequently, few studies have examined the interconnectedness between HIV knowledge, sexual relationship power, transactional sex, and safe-sex behaviors in SMM of color.…”