Division of Evidence-Based Medicine (dEBM), Department of Dermatology, Venereology and Allergy, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health, Berlin, Germany.
PLoS One. 2021 Nov 18;16(11):e0260168. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0260168. eCollection 2021.
While our knowledge of what motivates men who have sex with men (MSM) to use HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) has grown in recent years, quantitative survey-based studies have not asked MSM explicitly to name their motivations. We did so using a qualitative open-ended question and aimed to categorise the responses and explore whether these were related to where MSM were located along a conceptual continuum of PrEP care.
In a multicentre survey examining knowledge and use of PrEP among MSM in Berlin, Germany, we additionally asked an open-ended question about motivations for using or considering PrEP. Data were collected from 10/2017-04/2018. One researcher developed a thematic framework deductively from the literature and another did so inductively from the free-text data, and a merged framework was used to code responses independently. We used Fisher's exact test to assess whether the frequency of motivations differed significantly between respondents using or considering PrEP.
Of 875 questionnaires, 473 were returned and 228 contained a free-text response. Motivations in the following categories were reported: (1) Safety/protection against HIV (80.2% of participants, including general safety; additional protection to condoms), (2) Mental well-being and quality of life (23.5%, including reduced anxiety; better quality of life), (3) Condom attitudes (18.9% intent not to use condoms), (4) Expectations about sexuality (14.4%, including worry-free sex or more pleasurable sex, with explicit mention of sex or sexuality), (5) Norms/social perspectives (0.8%). The difference in frequencies of motivations between those using or considering PrEP was not statistically significant.
Safety and protection against HIV, particularly having additional protection if condoms fail, were the most common motivations for using or considering PrEP, followed by mental well-being and quality of life. Many respondents reported several motivations, and responses overall were heterogeneous. This suggests that approaches to increase PrEP uptake that focus exclusively on its effectiveness in preventing HIV are unlikely to be as successful as a holistic approach that emphasises multiple motivations and how these fit into the broader sexual and psychological health of MSM.
近年来,我们对促使男男性行为者(MSM)使用 HIV 暴露前预防(PrEP)的动机的了解有所增加,但基于定量调查的研究并未明确要求 MSM 说出他们的动机。我们使用开放式问题来实现这一目标,并旨在对这些回答进行分类,并探讨它们是否与 MSM 在 PrEP 护理的概念连续体上的位置有关。
在一项检查德国柏林 MSM 对 PrEP 的知识和使用情况的多中心调查中,我们还询问了一个关于使用或考虑使用 PrEP 的动机的开放式问题。数据收集于 2017 年 10 月至 2018 年 4 月。一位研究人员从文献中推导出一个主题框架,另一位则从自由文本数据中归纳出一个主题框架,然后使用合并的框架独立对回答进行编码。我们使用 Fisher 精确检验来评估使用或考虑使用 PrEP 的受访者的动机频率是否存在显著差异。
在 875 份问卷中,有 473 份被退回,其中 228 份包含自由文本回复。报告的动机类别包括:(1)安全性/预防 HIV(80.2%的参与者,包括一般安全性;对避孕套的额外保护),(2)心理健康和生活质量(23.5%,包括减少焦虑;更高的生活质量),(3)避孕套态度(18.9%意图不使用避孕套),(4)对性的期望(14.4%,包括无后顾之忧的性行为或更愉快的性行为,明确提到性行为或性),(5)规范/社会观点(0.8%)。使用或考虑 PrEP 的参与者在动机频率方面的差异无统计学意义。
预防 HIV 的安全性和保护,特别是如果避孕套失败时提供额外的保护,是使用或考虑使用 PrEP 的最常见动机,其次是心理健康和生活质量。许多受访者报告了多种动机,总体反应是多样化的。这表明,专注于 PrEP 预防 HIV 效果的增加 PrEP 使用率的方法不太可能像强调多种动机以及这些动机如何适应 MSM 的更广泛的性和心理健康的整体方法那样成功。