No abstract

BackgroundGendered power dynamics within couple relationships can constrain women from achieving positive sexual and reproductive health outcomes. But little is known about relationship power among adolescents, and tools to measure it are rarely validated among adolescents. We tested the Sexual Relationship Power Scale (SRPS) among adolescent girls and young women (AGYW) and examined associations with select health outcomes.MethodsA 16-item adaptation of the SRPS was administered to AGYW aged 15–24 in Kenya (n = 1,101). Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and theta coefficients assessed scale performance for three age bands: 15–17, 18–20, and 21–24 years old. Relationship power levels were examined and multivariate logistic regressions assessed the relationship between power, and partner violence and HIV risk outcomes.ResultsCFAs confirmed a one factor structure for each subgroup, and thetas for final 15-item scales were robust (>.82). Most respondents reported limited power in their sexual relationships, however older respondents consistently reported lower levels of power. Relationship power was strongly associated with several outcomes, even when controlling for socioeconomic status and schooling. For example, AGYW who reported more relationship power were 12, 6, and 7 times less likely (ages 21–24, 18–20, and 15–17, respectively) to experience sexual violence (p<0.001). Significant relationships were also found in multivariate analyses for physical partner violence (all three age bands), using a condom at last sex (18–20-year-olds), and increased knowledge of partner’s HIV status (21–24-year-olds).ConclusionsThe SRPS is a good measure of relationship power for several age bands within AGYW, and power is experienced differently by older and younger AGYW. Low relationship power was a consistent predictor of partner violence, as well as an important predictor of HIV risk. Interventions seeking to address HIV and violence should also explicitly address relationship power and utilize validated tools (like the SRPS) to evaluate impacts.

Background: HIV care continuum outcomes deteriorate among people returning from incarceration. Interventions to improve care outcomes postincarceration have been characterized by substantial heterogeneity in approach, outcome metrics, and results. A large number of recently published interventions have not been systematically reviewed. Methods: We searched peer reviewed and scholarly databases for published and gray literature describing interventions to improve HIV care continuum outcomes among individuals released from prison or jail. We systematically screened quantitative and qualitative intervention reports published through 2018, then extracted and analyzed study data using a classification scheme that we developed for categorizing intervention levels and strategies. Results: We included 23 reports from the peer-reviewed literature, 2 from gray literature, and 2 from conference abstracts (27 total). Seventeen studies were classified as individual level, 3 as biomedical level, 2 as organizational level, and 5 as multilevel. Nine studies were randomized controlled trials, 4 of which reported power calculations. Fifteen studies were quasiexperimental; one was a case study. Eleven studies were conducted in prisons, 7 in jails, and 9 in both prisons and jails. Of 11 studies reporting hypothesis tests, 5 found statistically significant effect sizes on primary outcomes. Conclusions: Interventions that demonstrate postrelease improvements in clinic attendance and viral suppression include patient navigation strategies, especially involving peer support, and substance use treatment strategies.

Background: We sought to describe linkage to care, ART continuity, and factors associated with linkage to care among people with HIV following release from incarceration in South Africa. Methods: We conducted a study of South African correctional service community reentrants who were receiving ART at the time of release. The study was implemented in three of 46 correctional service management areas. Participants were enrolled prior to corrections release and followed up to 90 days post-release to obtain selfreported linkage to care status and number of days of ART provided at corrections release. Clinic electronic and paper charts were sought and abstracted to verify self-reported linkage to care. Log-binomial regression, adjusted for facility, was used to identify associations with post-release linkage to care (self-reported and verified). We sought to specifically assess for associations with HIV diagnosis during index incarceration, ART initiation during index incarceration, and duration of incarceration. Results: From May 2014 to December 2016, 554 inmates met eligibility and 516 (93%) consented to participate; 391 were released on ART, 40 of whom were excluded from analysis post-release. Of the remaining 351, 301 (86%) were men and the median age was 35 years (interquartile range 30, 40). Linkage to care was self-reported by 227 (64%) and linkage to care could be verified for 121 (34%). At most, 47% of participants had no lapse in ART supply. Initiating ART during the index incarceration showed a trend toward increased self-reported post-release linkage to care. Age > 35 years was associated with increased verified linkage to care while HIV diagnosis outside of a correctional setting and ART initiation during the index incarceration showed trends toward association with increased verified linkage to care. Discussion: The results of our study are the first description of retention in care following correctional facility release from an African setting and indicate high levels of attrition during the transition from correctional facility to community care. Initiating ART within a correctional facility did not impair post-release linkage to care.