Download No Slide Title - CTN Dissemination Library

Survey
yes no Was this document useful for you?
   Thank you for your participation!

* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project

Document related concepts
no text concepts found
Transcript
Relationship between substance abuse treatment outcome
and sexual risk behaviors
Howard
1
Newville ,
James L.
1
Sorensen ,
Donald A.
2
Calsyn
1 University
of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA
2 University of Washington, Seattle, WA
Funding information: Supported by the National Institute of Drug Abuse (F32 DA032446, U10 DA13714, U10 DA015815, and P50 DA09253)
Aims
• This secondary data analysis will assess the impact of
drug treatment on HIV risk behaviors
• Hypothesis: decreases in drug and alcohol use at
follow-up will coincide with decreases in sex risk
behaviors
Methods
Setting and design
• NIDA Clinical Trials Network (CTN) study testing
innovative risk reduction against standard education
• Participants recruited from 7 methadone maintenance
(MMT) and 7 outpatient drug free (ODF) programs
• Diverse in terms of region, population density, and HIV
prevalence rates
• Urban (e.g., Philadelphia), suburban (e.g., Norwalk,
CT) and rural (e.g., Huntington, WV)
• Located in the Northeast, South, Midwest,
Southwest, and West
Measures
• Addiction Severity Index (ASI)
• Alcohol and drug composite scores
• Sexual Behavior Interview (SBI) (all behaviors – past 90
days)
1) % protected sex with main sex partner
2) % protected sex with a casual sex partner
3) Number of sex partners (0, 1, >1)
4) Having ≥1 high risk sex partner (“High risk” = IDU,
crack/cocaine, or thought to be HIV+)
5) Any sex under the influence
Multivariate analyses (continued)
• Eligibility requirements: (1) men ≥18 years old, in
substance abuse treatment, (2) reported unprotected
intercourse (past 6 months) (3) willing to be randomly
assigned to one of two interventions, (4) completed all
study assessments, and (5) English speaking
• Exclusion criteria: (1) gross mental status impairment; (2)
primary sexual partner intending to become pregnant
Number of sex partners
ASI alcohol: decreased for those whose number of
partners decreased (OR [95% CI]: 8.40 [1.07, 66.67],
p=0.043), increased for those whose number of
partners increased (OR [95% CI]: 21.87 [1.08, 443.00],
p=0.044) (Figures 1 & 3)
Data analysis
• Severity of drug/alcohol use and frequency of risk
behaviors calculated at baseline and six month follow-up
• Paired sample t-tests (for normal data) and Wilcoxon
signed-rank tests (for non-normal data) to assess
change over time
• Changes in drug/alcohol use severity by changes in risk
behaviors assessed with multinomial logistic regression
• Due to non-normal distributions, risk behaviors were
considered as increasing, decreasing, or stable
• Intervention sessions attended, treatment modality
(MMT vs. ODF), and present engagement in drug
treatment (0 vs. 1-29 vs. 30 days) added as
covariates
Results
Bivariate analyses
Drug use variables
Alcohol CS (Mean [SD])
Baseline – 0.09 (0.15); Follow-up – 0.07 (0.12), p<0.001
Drug CS (Mean [SD])
Baseline – 0.19 (0.14); Follow-up – 0.15 (0.13), p<0.001
Risk variables
% protected sex with a regular partner
Baseline – 11.6%; Follow-up – 20.7%, p<0.001
% protected sex with a casual partner
Baseline – 26.7%; Follow-up – 40.4%, p=0.038
Multiple sex partners
Baseline – 40.1%; Follow-up – 26.5%; p<0.001
At least one high risk sex partner
Baseline – 28.7%; Follow-up – 24.8%; p=0.302
Sex under the influence
Baseline – 70.8%; Follow-up – 51.3%; p<0.001
Treatment engagement (past 30 days)
0 days – 115 (24.9%), 1-29 days – 161 (34.9%), 30 days –
122 (26.5%)
Multivariate analyses
% protected sex w/ regular partner, % protected sex w/
casual partner
All individual items NS (Figures 1 & 3)
Sex under the influence
ASI drug: Those who discontinued SUI had greater
decreases than those who had no SUI at either time
(OR [95% CI]: 27.03 [1.21, 618.67], p=0.038) (Figures 2
& 4)
Figure 1 – ASI Alcohol, Condom Use, and Number of Partners
Change in ASI Alcohol CS
Participants
Figures
*
Frequency
Figure 2 – ASI Alcohol, SUI, and High Risk Partners
At least one high risk sex partner
ASI drug: Those who had high risk partners at both
times had greater decreases than those without high
risk partners at either time (OR [95% CI]: 90.91 [3.91,
2,040.81], p=0.005) (Figures 2 & 4)
Discussion
• Drug/alcohol use severity and most sex risk behaviors
decreased for individuals in drug treatment
• Changes in drug/alcohol use severity associated with
decreases in certain risk behaviors
• As drug treatment can decrease HIV seroconversion
(Farrell et al., 2005), it is viable for risk reduction
• However, not all sex risk behaviors decrease with drug
treatment alone, and further interventions within drug
treatment are necessary
• Innovative risk reduction interventions can decrease
risk (Calsyn et al., 2010)
References
Calsyn DA, Hatch-Maillette M, Tross S, et al. Motivational and
Skills Training HIV/STI Sexual Risk Reduction Groups for Men. J
Subst Abuse Treat. 2009 September ; 37(2): 138–150.
Carey JW, Mejia R, Bingham T, et al. Drug use, high-risk sex
behaviors, and increased risk for recent HIV infection among men
who have sex with men. AIDS Behav 2009; 13:1084-1096.
Des Jarlais DC, Arasteh K, McKnight C, et al. Gender and age
patterns in HSV-2 and HIV infection among non-injecting drug
users in New York City. Sex Transm Dis 2010; 37:637– 643.
Farrell M, Gowing L, Marsden J, Ling W, Ali R. Effectiveness of
drug dependence treatment in HIV prevention. Int J Drug Policy
2005; 16S:S67–75.
Plankey MW, Ostrow DG, Stall R, et al.. The relationship between
methamphetamine and popper use and risk of HIV
seroconversion in the multicenter AIDS cohort study. JAIDS 2007;
45: 85-92.
Sorensen JL, Copeland AL. Drug abuse treatment as an HIV
prevention strategy: A review. Drug Alc Depend 2000; 59:17-31.
Strathdee SA, Sherman SG. The role of sexual transmission of HIV
infection among injection and non-injection drug users. J Urban
Health 2003; 80(suppl 3):iii7–iii14.
Change in ASI Alcohol CS
• Non-injection drug users (NIDUs) have similar HIV rates
as injection drug users (IDUs) (Strathdee, 2003; Des
Jarlais, 2010)
• 13% among IDUs and 12% among NIDUs in a drug
treatment program study, 15% and 17% in a
respondent-driven sampling (RDS) storefront study
(Des Jarlais, 2007)
• The use of stimulants is associated with increased sex
risk behavior (Plankey et al., 2007)
• HIV+ individuals are more likely to have sex under
the influence of stimulants than HIV-negative
individuals (Carey et al., 2009)
• Drug treatment lessens drug use and IDU risk, but its
effects on sexual practices are unknown
• Sex risk behaviors are slower to change (Sorensen
& Copeland, 2000)
• Many substance users in treatment continue to
engage in sex risk behaviors (Farrell, Gowing,
Marsden, Ling & Ali, 2005)
Results (continued)
*
Status
Figure 3 – ASI Drug, Condom Use, and Number of Partners
Change in ASI Drug CS
Methods (continued)
Frequency
Figure 4 – ASI Drug, SUI, and High Risk Partners
*
Change in ASI Drug CS
Introduction
Funding information: Supported by the National Institute of Drug Abuse (F32 DA032446, U10 DA13714, U10 DA015815, and P50 DA09253)
Status