IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/aph/ajpbhl/10.2105-ajph.2004.047514_5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

"We have our protector": Misperceptions of protection against HIV among participants in a microbicide efficacy trial

Author

Listed:
  • Mantell, J.E.
  • Morar, N.S.
  • Myer, L.
  • Ramjee, G.

Abstract

Objectives. We examined perceptions of the effectiveness and acceptability of a candidate microbicide among 94 South African female sex workers who had participated in a phase 3 microbicide trial for HIV prevention. Methods. Sixteen focus groups were conducted in 2001, 12 to 15 months after participants were informed that the candidate microbicide had been determined to be ineffective in preventing HIV and other sexually transmitted infections (STIs). Results. Participants clearly indicated that they understood the experimental nature of the candidate microbicide, and they recognized that they had been informed after the trial that the product was ineffective. Nevertheless, most continued to believe that the candidate microbicide helped prevent HIV and other STIs, alleviated reproductive tract pain and STI symptoms, and helped to clean the vagina. Conclusions. These findings underscore the importance of understanding women's perceptions of the efficacy of candidate microbicides and the rationale for these beliefs. These issues need to be addressed in counseling throughout microbicide trials for HIV prevention. These results also demonstrate how desperate many women at high risk of HIV infection may be for new HIV prevention technologies.

Suggested Citation

  • Mantell, J.E. & Morar, N.S. & Myer, L. & Ramjee, G., 2006. ""We have our protector": Misperceptions of protection against HIV among participants in a microbicide efficacy trial," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 96(6), pages 1073-1077.
  • Handle: RePEc:aph:ajpbhl:10.2105/ajph.2004.047514_5
    DOI: 10.2105/AJPH.2004.047514
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.2105/AJPH.2004.047514
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2105/AJPH.2004.047514?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:aph:ajpbhl:10.2105/ajph.2004.047514_5. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Christopher F Baum (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.apha.org .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.