|
FOR THE past decade, the US Public
Health Service guidelines have recommended that individuals infected
with the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) notify their sexual
partners. Nondisclosure of HIV status has been condemned as both a
moral and a legal offense subject to both civil liability and
criminal prosecution.
However, practical and psychological difficulties of disclosure
exist for sexually active individuals living with HIV. Decisions
about disclosure of HIV status involve anxiety, stigma, and shame.
Divulging to sexual partners may lead to isolation or even physical
injury.
Most prevention messages on the
acquired immunodeficiency syndrome have promoted self-protection,
and condom use is recommended broadly if not universally for sexual
encounters. Counselors emphasize the high risk of particular
practices and advise questioning of potential partners' risk
histories. Still, condoms may fail and partners may not be truthful.
Studies continue to identify substantial sexual activity among
people aware that they are infected with HIV.
Sexual responsibility and honest disclosure by seropositive
individuals remain at the center of HIV prevention.[3]
Studies focusing on homosexual
and bisexual men have detailed the patterns of disclosure of HIV
status to sexual partners.
High proportions of homosexual men informed their primary or steady
sexual partners of their HIV status; lower numbers informed casual
partners. Most of these studies were performed earlier in the
epidemic when fewer treatments were available and when the stigma
associated with HIV disease may have been greater. Data regarding
disclosure among infected women and drug users are limited, and
little is known about the specific factors associated with
disclosure of HIV infection to sexual partners in more heterogeneous
samples.[4]
To determine factors associated
with disclosure of HIV status to sexual partners, we interviewed
individuals at 2 outpatient HIV clinics seeking primary medical care
for HIV.
PATIENTS AND METHODS
Patients were
enrolled from 2 sites: Boston City Hospital (BCH) HIV Diagnostic
Evaluation Unit, Boston, Mass, from February 1994 to April 1996 and
Rhode Island Hospital (RIH) HIV Clinic, Providence, from February
1995 to April 1996. These sites are responsible for the initial
assessment and triage of all new patients with HIV infection at
their respective institutions. Referrals come from a variety of
sources including inpatient hospital services, hospital clinics,
emergency departments, community health centers, drug treatment
programs, HIV testing sites, prisons, and homeless outreach
programs.
The subjects were patients who
sought primary care for HIV for the first time. Only patients fluent
in English, Spanish, or Haitian Creole were eligible. Each patient
provided written informed consent prior to entering the study. This
study was approved by the institutional review boards at both sites.
Patients were asked to
participate in this study after initial clinical care was performed,
including history taking, physical examination, and laboratory
tests. At RIH this was at the initial encounter, and at BCH this was
at a subsequent appointment generally 1 week after the initial
clinical visit. Patients agreed to participate in a 60- to 90-minute
standardized interview concerning behavioral, medical, and social
history. All study instruments were translated into Spanish and
Haitian Creole and translated back into English to check for
accuracy. For non-English-speaking patients, these instruments were
used by interpreters working with research associates. To optimize
truthfulness of patient reports, interviews were conducted in
private settings by interviewers not involved in the patients'
clinical care. Patients were also assured that no information
collected would be reported to their patient care team or recorded
in the medical record.
Measures
The primary
outcome of interest was whether patients had told all the sexual
partners they had been with during the past 6 months that they were
positive for HIV. Patients were also asked if they had disclosed
their HIV status (hereafter referred to as disclosure) to spouses or
significant others and if they had not, they were given a list of
reasons for nondisclosure and asked to respond to all that applied.
Independent variables examined
included demographics (age, sex, race [white, black, Latino, or
other]), birthplace (United States or other), English as a first
language, education (less than high school graduation or high school
graduate), employment, homelessness, HIV transmission risk group
(injection drug use, men who have sex with men, or heterosexual),
number of sexual partners in the past year (1 vs >2), history
of physical or sexual violence, history of injection drug use,
alcohol abuse (>2 positive answers on CAGE
[Cut/Annoyed/Guilty/Eye] Questionnaire, a screening test for alcohol
problems,
and enrollment site. Single items regarding spousal or significant
other social support (none vs some or a lot) and friend support
(none vs some or a lot) were also included. Frequency of condom use
was assessed (all the time vs most, half, rarely, or none of the
time) and considered an independent variable. Clinical variables
included HIV-related physical symptoms (number of symptoms),
duration of HIV diagnosis, an indicator of current depression using
the Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale (depression
scored as >16)
and CD4 cell count obtained within 3 months of initial medical
evaluation; when 2 counts were available we used the mean count.
Data Analysis
The dependent
variable in the analysis is an indicator of whether patients
disclosed to all sexual partners in the last 6 months. A variety of
independent variables (described above) was selected for potential
inclusion in a model to discriminate patients who did and did not
disclose. Descriptive statistics were generated for each independent
variable; bivariate analyses were then conducted between each
independent variable and disclosure status, using 2 independent
sample t tests and chi2 analysis for continuous
and discrete independent variables, respectively. Variables that
were statistically significant (P<.05) in the bivariate
analyses or clinically relevant were entered into a multiple
logistic regression model. Meaningful 2-way interaction effects
between significant independent variables were investigated using
contingency table analyses. A 2-tailed P<.05 was considered
statistically significant in bivariate and multivariable analyses.
Data were analyzed using SAS statistical software (SAS Institute
Inc, Cary, NC).
RESULTS
Two hundred
seventy-six eligible patients presented for initial primary care for
HIV at the 2 sites during the study period. Enrolled patients
represented 74% of all eligible patients presenting for initial
primary care for HIV infection from both sites during the period of
study. This represents 68% of patients at BCH and 98% of patients at
RIH. At the BCH site, 72 patients were not enrolled in this study,
including 37 who refused to participate, 25 who agreed to
participate but never returned for the initial interview, and 10 who
were never contacted. There were no significant differences between
patients who enrolled in the study and those who were not enrolled
with respect to age, sex, and HIV risk group category. There was a
significant difference with respect to race (P<.05):
disproportionately fewer Haitians and more whites enrolled in the
study compared with Latinos and blacks. Of the remaining 203
patients, 129 reported having sexual partners during the previous 6
months and these constitute the study sample (101 at BCH and 28 at
RIH). |
|
|
The odds that a person with 1
sexual partner disclosed was 3.2 times the odds that a person with
multiple sexual partners disclosed. The odds that a person with high
spousal support disclosed was 2.8 times the odds for those without
spousal support, and the odds that whites or Latinos disclosed was
3.1 times the odds that blacks disclosed.
We also investigated 2-way
interaction effects between race and the following independent
variables: education, spousal support, sex, number of sexual
partners, and history of injection drug use. In general, blacks had
lower rates of disclosure regardless of their status with respect to
the second independent variable. The effects of education, spousal
support, sex, number of sexual partners, and history of injection
drug use were similar between blacks vs whites or Latinos and did
not support the inclusion of interaction terms in the model.
COMMENT
In our study,
40% of sexually active HIV-positive patients new to medical care had
not disclosed their serostatus to all their sexual partners in the
prior 6 months. In addition, among those who had not disclosed, only
42% used condoms all the time. Our findings suggest that unknowing
sexual partners of HIV-infected persons continue to be at risk for
HIV transmission.
There are powerful forces
working in favor of nondisclosure. First, there are psychological
consequences of disclosure, especially the risk of rejection. The
reasons for nondisclosure to significant others and spouses listed
by respondents speak to the many ways that this fear manifests.
Second, there are practical social ramifications—desired sexual
encounters may be missed, financial or sick care support may be
denied. Third, HIV-infected individuals may rationalize that their
partners need to protect themselves; thus, it is every individual's
responsibility. Why risk the possible losses described above?
Perhaps those who do not disclose believe they are not putting
others at risk, or at very low risk, because they are avoiding
specific higher-risk practices such as anal intercourse, or because
they are regularly using condoms. Yet arguments have been made that
partners would want to know HIV status even within the context of
safer sex.
Individuals may feel different
responsibilities to different partners. Other studies suggest that
homosexual men are far more likely to disclose to intimate or steady
partners than to casual or nonprimary partners.[8] Schnell et al[9]
note that 89% of homosexual men disclosed to their "main sexual
partner," Mansergh et al[15] found that 93% of men disclosed to
their "intimate lover," and Hays et al[10] noted 98% disclosed to
"lover/partner." Marks et al[8] found that 52% of Hispanic men had
kept the infection secret from 1 or more partners. Stempel et
al[11]found that 1 year after learning of their HIV-positive status,
homosexual men in San Francisco, Calif, had disclosed to 82% of
"lovers" and 60% of other sexual partners. We found that people with
only 1 partner were significantly more likely to disclose to that
partner than individuals with more partners. Still, 21% of
individuals in our study who had only 1 partner did not inform them,
and 12% of individuals with a spouse or significant other did not
disclose.
There are certainly risks to
nondisclosure as well. Concealment of HIV status may be stressful,
and the pain of deception and putting others at risk may feel
isolating. Nondisclosure removes people who may offer social
support, which has been noted to lessen the effect of physical
symptoms on depression.
In studies[11,15] of homosexual men, disclosure was generally better
received by partners than expected. In another study[12] of
homosexual men, as in results reported herein, perceived social
support has been shown to be a predictor of self-disclosure.
There are several limitations to
these data. First, we did not capture respondents' perceptions or
knowledge of the HIV status of their sexual partners, nor the length
of relationships with partners. Other work[8] has demonstrated that
HIV-positive men are more likely to disclose to partners who are
also infected with HIV. Second, we did not define "sexual" for
respondents, and because we did not collect data on specific sexual
behavior, we cannot define the risk of individuals in our study
transmitting HIV to their "sexual partners." However, if "sex" was
considered penetrative by respondents, and only 42% of our sample
used condoms all the time, then risk of transmission certainly
exists despite the variability of individual sexual practices.
Third, we cannot pinpoint when disclosure occurred; disclosure may
have occurred after unsafe sexual activity. Fourth, nondisclosure
includes 2 possibilities—nondiscussion or deception.
Our data do not allow examination of this issue. Fifth, we relied on
patient self-report. Validation of this self-reporting is not
possible, but self-report is likely to result in underestimation of
nondisclosure. Finally, our cohort was not population based and
included only individuals who have sought medical care.
This study, sampling a
heterogeneous group of HIV-infected individuals, is consistent with
previous work describing rates of disclosure among HIV-positive men.
In this group, as in others, those with fewer partners disclosed
more often to all partners. In addition, we found that high spousal
or significant other support was associated with disclosure. Because
this study was cross-sectional, it is impossible to determine the
direction of causality between disclosure and spousal support. It
seems more reasonable to assume that spousal support leads to
disclosure.
While there has been some
concern that perhaps women do not reveal their status to male
partners because of risk of injury, women in this study were more
likely to reveal their serostatus to sexual partners than men. This
higher likelihood of disclosure by women underscores the need to
further examine the relationship of disclosure and victimization.
Previous studies[13,15] have
noted ethnic differences in disclosure. In our study, the
association between race and disclosure persisted in multiple
logistic regression analysis that controlled for both demographic
and medical variables. Although we tested for interaction effects,
we found none. It is always difficult to completely rule out
confounding factors not included in a study; however, our finding
that blacks had lower rates of disclosure than whites or Latinos may
stem from cultural attitudes. The acquired immunodeficiency syndrome
may be viewed with particular shame and dishonor in the black
community.
Other studies[10,13] suggest
that disclosure to family and friends is correlated with length of
time since HIV diagnosis and symptoms. Yet neither of these
associations has been observed regarding disclosure to intimate
partners either in our data or in other reports.[15] This suggests
that specific factors may differentially influence when individuals
are willing to disclose to sexual partners compared with others.
In addition to population-based
prevention efforts, our data suggest that interventions that assist
disclosure targeted at people with HIV who do not disclose their
serostatus to sexual partners are needed. Many state health
departments will notify previous partners for reluctant persons.
However, there are clear limits of contact tracing, including
unreliable recall of partners, unwillingness to identify partners,
confidentiality concerns, and inadequate systems for locating
identified partners. The laws that govern the notification of third
parties vary in who may make contact, what is said, and under what
conditions.
Disclosure interventions can
also take place in primary care offices and clinics as well as
through special counseling programs.
The HIV-infected individuals clearly need assistance in informing
others. Guidelines are also needed for clinicians who wish to help
HIV-infected patients disclose their serostatus and/or protect
partners through behavior change. Clinicians should take sexual
histories that include questions regarding both current and past
sexual partners. Also, discussion can include an appeal to
self-protection, describing to nondisclosers who are not practicing
safer sex the risk of contracting other sexually transmitted
diseases, new strains of HIV, and pregnancy. Many HIV-infected
individuals may no longer view themselves as at risk for other
infections. Individuals who disclosed in our study were not more
likely to use condoms all the time, and the reasons for this need to
be addressed openly. Disclosure itself does not ensure reduced HIV
risk behaviors.
Disclosure is a multifaceted
issue that may be influenced by an individual's perception of the
social, psychological, and material consequences of informing
others. The HIV-infected individuals remain sexually active long
after they become aware of their infection. In the end, disclosure
requires personal responsibility. Not only past partners but
potential partners need to be informed. This is a challenge to all
relationships, but will remain central to limiting the spread of the
acquired immunodeficiency syndrome.
From the Department of Medicine,
Brown University School of Medicine, Providence, Rhode Island (Dr
Stein), and the Department of Medicine, Boston Medical Center and
the Departments of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Epidemiology and
Biostatistics, Boston University School of Medicine and Public
Health, Boston, Mass (Drs Freedberg, Sullivan, Hingson, and Samet
and Mss Savetsky and Levenson).
Accepted for publication June 9,
1997.
Presented at the 20th Annual
Meeting of the Society of General Internal Medicine, Washington, DC,
May 1-3, 1997.
Reprints: Michael D. Stein, MD,
Division of General Internal Medicine, Rhode Island Hospital, 593
Eddy St, Providence, RI 02903.
References
Centers for Disease Control. Public Health Service guidelines
for counseling and antibody testing to prevent HIV infection and
AIDS. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 1987;36:509-515.
Wein M. Duty to warn. JAMA. 1989;261:1355-1360.
Bayer R. AIDS prevention: sexual ethics and responsibility.
N Engl J Med. 1996;334:1540-1542.
Wenger NS, Kusseling FS, Beck K, Shapiro MF. Sexual behavior
of individuals infected with the human immunodeficiency virus.
Arch Intern Med. 1994;154:1849-1854.
McCusker J, Stoddard AM, Mayer KH, Zapka J, Morrison C,
Saltzman SP. Effects of HIV antibody test knowledge on subsequent
sexual behaviors in a cohort of homosexually active men. Am J
Public Health. 1988;78:462-467.
Penkower L, Dew MA, Kingsley L, et al. Behavioral, health and
psychosocial factors and risk for HIV infection among sexually
active homosexual men: the multicenter AIDS cohort study. Am J
Public Health. 1991;81:194-196.
Cleary PD, van Devanter N, Rogers TF, et al. Behavior changes
after notification of HIV infection. Am J Public Health.
1991;81:1586-1590.
Marks G, Richardson JL, Maldonado N. Self-disclosure of HIV
infection to sexual partners. Am J Public Health.
1991;81:1321-1323.
Schnell DJ, Higgins DL, Wilson RM, Goldbaum G, Cohn DL,
Wolitski RJ. Men's disclosure of HIV test results to male primary
sex partners. Am J Public Health. 1992;82:1675-1676.
Hays RB, McKusick L, Pollack L, Hilliard R, Hoff C, Coates
TJ. Disclosing HIV seropositivity to significant others. AIDS.
1993;7:425-431.
Stempel RR, Moulton JM, Moss AR. Self-disclosure of HIV-1
antibody test results: The San Francisco General Hospital Cohort.
AIDS Educ Prev. 1995;7:116-123.
Perry SW, Card CAL, Moffatt M, Ashman T, Fishman B,
Jacobsberg LB. Self-disclosure of HIV infection to sexual partners
after repeated counseling. AIDS Educ Prev. 1994;6:403-411.
Mason HR, Marks G, Simoni JM, Ruiz MS, Richardson JL.
Culturally sanctioned secrets? Latino men's nondisclosure of HIV
infection to family, friends and lovers. Health Psychol.
1995;14:6-12.
Marks G, Ruiz MS, Richardson JL, et al. Anal intercourse and
disclosure of HIV infection among seropositive gay and bisexual men.
J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 1994;7:866-869.
Mansergh G, Marks G, Simoni JM. Self-disclosure of HIV
infection among men who vary in time since seropositive diagnosis
and symptomatic status. AIDS. 1995;9:639-644.
Mayfield D, McLeod G, Hall P. The CAGE Questionnaire:
validation of a new alcohol screening instrument. Am J Psychol.
1974;131:1121-1123.
Radloff LS. The CES-D scale: a self-report depression scale
for research in the general population. J Appl Psychol Measure.
1977;1:385-401.
Hays RB, Turner HA, Coates TJ. Social support: HIV symptoms
and depression among gay men. J Consult Clin Psychol.
1992;60:463-469.
Cochran SD, Mays VM. Sex, lies, and HIV. N Engl J Med.
1990;322:774775.
Francis DP, Anderson RE, Gorman ME, et al. Targeting AIDS
prevention and treatment toward HIV-1-infected persons. JAMA.
1989;262:2572-2576.
Padian NS, O'Brien TR, Chang Y, Glass S, Francis DP.
Prevention of heterosexual transmission of human immunodeficiency
virus through couple counseling. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr.
1993;6:1043-1048.
|
|