Tsai Alexander C, Hatcher Abigail M, Bukusi Elizabeth A, Weke Elly, Lemus Hufstedler Lee, Dworkin Shari L, Kodish Stephen, Cohen Craig R, Weiser Sheri D
Center for Global Health, Massachusetts General Hospital, 125 Nashua Street, Ste. 722, Boston, MA, 02114, USA.
Harvard Center for Population and Development Studies, Cambridge, MA, USA.
AIDS Behav. 2017 Jan;21(1):248-260. doi: 10.1007/s10461-015-1285-6.
The scale-up of effective treatment has partially reduced the stigma attached to HIV, but HIV still remains highly stigmatized throughout sub-Saharan Africa. Most studies of anti-HIV stigma interventions have employed psycho-educational strategies such as information provision, counseling, and testimonials, but these have had varying degrees of success. Theory suggests that livelihood interventions could potentially reduce stigma by weakening the instrumental and symbolic associations between HIV and premature morbidity, economic incapacity, and death, but this hypothesis has not been directly examined. We conducted a longitudinal qualitative study among 54 persons with HIV participating in a 12-month randomized controlled trial of a livelihood intervention in rural Kenya. Our study design permitted assessment of changes over time in the perspectives of treatment-arm participants (N = 45), as well as an understanding of the experiences of control arm participants (N = 9, interviewed only at follow-up). Initially, participants felt ashamed of their seropositivity and were socially isolated (internalized stigma). They also described how others in the community discriminated against them, labeled them as being "already dead," and deemed them useless and unworthy of social investment (perceived and enacted stigma). At follow-up, participants in the treatment arm described less stigma and voiced positive changes in confidence and self-esteem. Concurrently, they observed that other community members perceived them as active, economically productive, and contributing citizens. None of these changes were noted by participants in the control arm, who described ongoing and continued stigma. In summary, our findings suggest a theory of stigma reduction: livelihood interventions may reduce internalized stigma among persons with HIV and also, by targeting core drivers of negative attitudes toward persons with HIV, positively change attitudes toward persons with HIV held by others. Further research is needed to formally test these hypotheses, assess the extent to which these changes endure over the long term, and determine whether this class of interventions can be implemented at scale.
扩大有效治疗在一定程度上减少了与艾滋病毒相关的污名,但在撒哈拉以南非洲地区,艾滋病毒仍然受到高度污名化。大多数关于抗艾滋病毒污名干预措施的研究采用了心理教育策略,如提供信息、咨询和现身说法,但这些策略取得的成功程度各不相同。理论表明,生计干预措施有可能通过削弱艾滋病毒与过早发病、经济能力丧失和死亡之间的工具性和象征性联系来减少污名,但这一假设尚未得到直接检验。我们对54名艾滋病毒感染者进行了一项纵向定性研究,这些感染者参与了肯尼亚农村一项为期12个月的生计干预随机对照试验。我们的研究设计允许评估治疗组参与者(N = 45)随时间变化的观点,同时了解对照组参与者(N = 9,仅在随访时接受访谈)的经历。最初,参与者对自己的血清阳性感到羞愧,并在社会上孤立无援(内化污名)。他们还描述了社区中的其他人如何歧视他们,将他们标记为“已经死了”,并认为他们无用且不值得社会投资(感知和实施的污名)。在随访时,治疗组的参与者表示污名减少,并表示信心和自尊有积极变化。同时,他们观察到其他社区成员认为他们是积极、有经济生产力且有贡献的公民。对照组的参与者没有注意到这些变化,他们描述了持续存在的污名。总之,我们的研究结果提出了一种减少污名的理论:生计干预措施可能会减少艾滋病毒感染者的内化污名,并且通过针对对艾滋病毒感染者负面态度的核心驱动因素,积极改变他人对艾滋病毒感染者的态度。需要进一步的研究来正式检验这些假设,评估这些变化在长期内持续的程度,并确定这类干预措施是否能够大规模实施。