Department of Anthropology, Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan 48103, USA.
AIDS Patient Care STDS. 2011 Sep;25(9):547-55. doi: 10.1089/apc.2010.0345. Epub 2011 Jul 21.
To date, only modest gains have been achieved in explaining adherence to medical regimens, limiting effective interventions. This is a particularly important issue for African Americans who are disproportionately affected by the HIV epidemic. Few studies have focused on intragroup variation among African Americans in adherence to ART. The aim of this study was to identify and describe the cultural rationales guiding African American patients' formulation and evaluation of adherence. Rationales are key features of purposeful human action. In-depth interviews with 80 seropositive African Americans were tape recorded, transcribed, and analyzed. Participant CD4, viral load and medical histories were collected at each data point. Analysis of four waves of panel data identified three types of adherence rationales: Authoritative Knowledge Rationale (AKR; n=29, 36.3%), Following Doctors' Orders Rationale (DOR; n=24, 30.0%) and Individualized Adherence Rationale (IAR; n=27, 33.8%). Differences in mean reported adherence between the rationale groups did not achieve statistical significance. However, the fraction reporting low adherence (<70%), although not different by rationale group at the first interview (T1), was significantly higher for the IAR group by the fourth interview (T4). Objective clinical markers (CD4 and viral load) improved over time (from T1 to T4) for AKR and DOR groups, but remained unchanged for the IAR group, yet self-reported adherence declined for all groups over the course of the four interviews.
迄今为止,在解释对医疗方案的坚持度,限制有效的干预措施方面,仅取得了适度的进展。这对受 HIV 疫情影响不成比例的非裔美国人来说是一个特别重要的问题。几乎没有研究关注非裔美国人在接受抗逆转录病毒治疗方面的群体内差异。本研究的目的是确定并描述指导非裔美国患者制定和评估坚持治疗方案的文化性基本原理。基本原理是非有意行为的关键特征。对 80 名血清阳性的非裔美国人进行了深入访谈,对访谈进行了录音、转录和分析。在每个数据点都收集了参与者的 CD4、病毒载量和病史。对四轮面板数据的分析确定了三种坚持治疗方案的基本原理:权威性知识基本原理(AKR;n=29,36.3%)、听从医生的指令基本原理(DOR;n=24,30.0%)和个体化坚持治疗方案基本原理(IAR;n=27,33.8%)。基本原理组之间的平均报告坚持治疗方案的差异没有达到统计学意义。然而,在第一轮访谈(T1)时,报告低坚持度(<70%)的比例在 IAR 组中并不因基本原理组而异,但在第四轮访谈(T4)时,IAR 组的报告比例明显更高。AKR 和 DOR 组的客观临床指标(CD4 和病毒载量)随着时间的推移(从 T1 到 T4)有所改善,但 IAR 组没有变化,然而,所有组的自我报告坚持治疗方案在四轮访谈过程中都有所下降。