Advertisement

AIDS and Behavior

, Volume 23, Issue 2, pp 366–374 | Cite as

“Unspoken Agreements”: Perceived Acceptability of Couples HIV Testing and Counseling (CHTC) Among Cisgender Men with Transgender Women Partners

  • Sari L. ReisnerEmail author
  • David Menino
  • Kingsley Leung
  • Kristi E. Gamarel
Original Paper

Abstract

Transgender women (TW) are one of the highest risk groups for HIV infection globally; however, the HIV testing needs of their cisgender (non-transgender) male partners remain largely unknown. This study sought to examine the perceived acceptability of couples HIV testing and counseling (CHTC) for TW-male dyads from the perspective of cisgender men who partner with TW. Between September 2016 and June 2017, 19 cisgender men (mean age = 40.1, SD = 12.8) who currently have, or have ever had a TW partner completed an in-depth semi-structured phone interview and brief survey to gather data on acceptability of CHTC, as well as perceived barriers and facilitators to CHTC for TW-male couples. Qualitative data were thematically analyzed and integrated with survey data. Acceptability of CHTC was high in the sample (89.5%) but was complex and largely contingent on: (1) monogamy and commitment as critical precursors to CHTC acceptability; (2) risk perception and level of comfort with CHTC; (3) understandings of sexual agreements; and (4) personal relationships versus other TW-male relationships. Findings have implications for culturally-adapting and implementing CHTC in real-world settings for TW-male couples, as well as for meeting the individual HIV testing needs of cisgender men who partner with TW.

Keywords

Transgender women Men who partner with transgender women HIV infection Couples HIV counseling and testing (CHTC) Intervention 

Notes

Funding

This publication was supported by a developmental grant awarded to PI Dr. Reisner (CFAR-FCHC-15-1) by: (1) the Harvard University Center for AIDS Research (CFAR), an NIH funded program (P30 AI060354), which is supported by the following NIH Co-Funding and Participating Institutes and Centers: NIAID, NCI, NICHD, NHLBI, NIDA, NIMH, NIA, FIC, and OAR; (2) the Harvard Global Health Institute (HGHI). The findings and conclusions in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent any official position of the funders.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in this study involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

References

  1. 1.
    Baral SD, Poteat T, Stromdahl S, Wirtz AL, Guadamuz TE, Beyrer C. Worldwide burden of HIV in transgender women: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Infect Dis. 2013;13(3):214–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Nemoto T, Operario D, Keatley J, Han L, Soma T. HIV risk behaviors among male-to-female transgender persons of color in San Francisco. Am J Public Health. 2004;94(7):1193–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Operario D, Nemoto T, Iwamoto M, Moore T. Risk for HIV and unprotected sexual behavior in male primary partners of transgender women. Arch Sex Behav. 2011;40(6):1255–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Nemoto T, Operario D, Keatley J, Villegas D. Social context of HIV risk behaviours among male-to-female transgenders of colour. AIDS Care. 2004;16(6):724–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Operario D, Nemoto T, Iwamoto M, Moore T. Unprotected sexual behavior and HIV risk in the context of primary partnerships for transgender women. AIDS Behav. 2011;15(3):674–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gamarel KE, Reisner SL, Darbes LA, Hoff CC, Chakravarty D, Nemoto T, et al. Dyadic dynamics of HIV risk among transgender women and their primary male sexual partners: the role of sexual agreement types and motivations. AIDS Care. 2016;28(1):104–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Operario D, Burton J, Underhill K, Sevelius J. Men who have sex with transgender women: challenges to category-based HIV prevention. AIDS Behav. 2008;12(1):18–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Parsons JT, Starks TJ, Gamarel KE, Grov C. Non-monogamy and sexual relationship quality among same-sex male couples. J Fam Psychol. 2012;26(5):669–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gass K, Hoff CC, Stephenson R, Sullivan PS. Sexual agreements in the partnerships of internet-using men who have sex with men. AIDS Care. 2012;24(10):1255–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hoff CC, Beougher SC, Chakravarty D, Darbes LA, Neilands TB. Relationship characteristics and motivations behind agreements among gay male couples: differences by agreement type and couple serostatus. AIDS Care. 2010;22(7):827–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mitchell JW, Harvey SM, Champeau D, Seal DW. Relationship factors associated with HIV risk among a sample of gay male couples. AIDS Behav. 2012;16(2):404–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Operario D, Gamarel KE, Iwamoto M, Suzuki S, Suico S, Darbes L, et al. Couples-focused prevention program to reduce HIV Risk among transgender women and their primary male partners: feasibility and promise of the couples HIV intervention program. AIDS Behav. 2017;21(8):2452–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Schulden JD, Song B, Barros A, Mares-DelGrasso A, Martin CW, Ramirez R, et al. Rapid HIV testing in transgender communities by community-based organizations in three cities. Public Health Rep. 2008;123(Suppl 3):101–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Habarta N, Wang G, Mulatu MS, Larish N. HIV testing by transgender status at centers for disease control and prevention-funded sites in the United States, Puerto Rico, and US Virgin Islands, 2009–2011. Am J Public Health. 2015;105(9):1917–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Clark H, Babu AS, Wiewel EW, Opoku J, Crepaz N. Diagnosed HIV infection in transgender adults and adolescents: results from the National HIV Surveillance System, 2009–2014. AIDS Behav. 2017;21(9):2774–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Reisner S, Mimiaga M, Bland SE, Driscoll MA, Cranston K, Mayer KH. Pathways to embodiment of HIV risk: black men who have sex with transgender partners, Boston, Massachusetts. AIDS Educ Prev. 2012;24(1):15–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sullivan PS, Stephenson R, Grazter B, Wingood G, Diclemente R, Allen S, et al. Adaptation of the African couples HIV testing and counseling model for men who have sex with men in the United States: an application of the ADAPT-ITT framework. Springerplus. 2014;3:249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Neme S, Goldenberg T, Stekler JD, Sullivan PS, Stephenson R. Attitudes towards couples HIV testing and counseling among Latino men who have sex with men in the Seattle area. AIDS Care. 2015;27(10):1354–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Bazzi AR, Fergus KB, Stephenson R, Finneran CA, Coffey-Esquivel J, Hidalgo MA, et al. A dyadic behavioral intervention to optimize same sex male couples’ engagement across the HIV care continuum: development of and protocol for an innovative couples-based approach (Partner steps). JMIR Res Protoc. 2016;5(3):e168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Stephenson R, Freeland R, Sullivan SP, Riley E, Johnson BA, Mitchell J, et al. Home-based HIV testing and counseling for male couples (project nexus): a protocol for a randomized controlled trial. JMIR Res Protoc. 2017;6(5):e101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Stephenson R, Grabbe KL, Sidibe T, McWilliams A, Sullivan PS. Technical assistance needs for successful implementation of couples HIV testing and counseling (CHTC) intervention for male couples at US HIV testing sites. AIDS Behav. 2016;20(4):841–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Reisner S, Gamarel K, Coffey-Esquivel J, et al. Project LUST: adapting couples HIV testing and counseling (CHTC) for transgender women and their cisgender male sexual partners. Harvard University Center for AIDS Research Conference, Boston, MA. 2015.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Braun V, Clarke V. What can “thematic analysis” offer health and wellbeing researchers? Int J Qual Stud Health Well-Being. 2014;9:26152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Stephenson R, Finneran C, Goldenberg T, Coury-Doniger P, Senn TE, Urban M, et al. Willingness to use couples HIV testing and discussion of sexual agreements among heterosexuals. Springerplus. 2015;4:169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Stephenson R, Sullivan PS, Salazar LF, Gratzer B, Allen S, Seelbach E. Attitudes towards couples-based HIV testing among MSM in three US cities. AIDS Behav. 2011;15(Suppl 1):S80–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Wagenaar BH, Christiansen-Lindquist L, Khosropour C, Salazar LF, Benbow N, Prachand N, et al. Willingness of US men who have sex with men (MSM) to participate in Couples HIV Voluntary Counseling and Testing (CVCT). PLoS ONE. 2012;7(8):e42953.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Mitchell JW. Gay male couples’ attitudes toward using couples-based voluntary HIV counseling and testing. Arch Sex Behav. 2014;43(1):161–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Turan JM, Darbes LA, Musoke PL, Kwena Z, Rogers AJ, Hatcher AM, et al. Development and piloting of a home-based couples intervention during pregnancy and postpartum in Southwestern Kenya. AIDS Patient Care STDS. 2018;32(3):92–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sari L. Reisner
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    Email author
  • David Menino
    • 1
  • Kingsley Leung
    • 2
  • Kristi E. Gamarel
    • 4
  1. 1.Division of General PediatricsBoston Children’s Hospital and Harvard Medical SchoolBostonUSA
  2. 2.Department of EpidemiologyHarvard T.H. Chan School of Public HealthBostonUSA
  3. 3.The Fenway Institute, Fenway HealthBostonUSA
  4. 4.Department of Health Behavior and Health EducationUniversity of Michigan School of Public HealthAnn ArborUSA

Personalised recommendations