Advertisement

AIDS and Behavior

, Volume 23, Issue 7, pp 1904–1916 | Cite as

Applying the Information–Motivation–Behavioral Skills Model to Understand PrEP Intentions and Use Among Men Who Have Sex with Men

  • Jennifer L. WalshEmail author
Original Paper

Abstract

Research is needed to determine targets for interventions to increase pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) uptake. The Information–Motivation–Behavioral Skills (IMB) model has not been tested for PrEP use among men who have sex with men (MSM). Men and transgender women and men were surveyed at a community event in the Midwest in 2016 (N = 476, 60% White, Mage = 35). New measures assessed PrEP knowledge, attitudes, stigma, descriptive and subjective norms, and intentions, and participants reported on PrEP use. We tested the IMB model for a subsample of HIV-negative MSM and transgender individuals (N = 357) using structural equation modeling. Only 12% of participants used PrEP. New measures performed well and were reliable (αs = 0.83–0.94). Structural models generally supported the IMB model: knowledge, stigma, and self-efficacy were directly associated with use, and attitudes, stigma, and descriptive norms had indirect effects on use via self-efficacy. The IMB model may be useful when developing PrEP interventions for MSM.

Keywords

Pre-exposure prophylaxis Information–motivation–behavioral skills model Men who have sex with men HIV prevention 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The author thanks Michelle Broaddus, Andrew Petroll, and Katherine Quinn for their contributions to measure development.

Funding

This study was funded by National Institutes of Health Grants 5P30-MH052776 and K01-MH099956.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

Jennifer L. Walsh declares that she has no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

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

Informed Consent

The data collected in this study were fully anonymous. Due to the low-risk nature of the study, participants received an informational letter describing the study, and completion of the survey constituted consent.

Supplementary material

10461_2018_2371_MOESM1_ESM.docx (42 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 41 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Prejean J, Song R, Hernandez A, Ziebell R, Green T, Walker F, et al. Estimated HIV incidence in the United States, 2006–2009. PLoS ONE. 2011;6(8):e17502.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Monitoring selected national HIV prevention and care objectives by using HIV surveillance data—United States and 6 US dependent areas—2010. HIV Surveill. 2012;17:3.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Thigpen MC, Kebaabetswe PM, Paxton LA, Smith DK, Rose CE, Segolodi TM, et al. Antiretroviral preexposure prophylaxis for heterosexual HIV transmission in Botswana. N Engl J Med. 2012;367(5):423–34.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Baeten JM, Donnell D, Ndase P, Mugo NR, Campbell JD, Wangisi J, et al. Antiretroviral prophylaxis for HIV prevention in heterosexual men and women. N Engl J Med. 2012;367(5):399–410.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Grant RM, Lama JR, Anderson PL, McMahan V, Liu AY, Vargas L, et al. Preexposure chemoprophylaxis for HIV prevention in men who have sex with men. New Engl J Med. 2010;363(27):2587–99.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Molina J-M, Capitant C, Spire B, Pialoux G, Chidiac C, Charreau I: On demand PrEP with oral TDF-FTC in MSM: Results of the ANRS Ipergay trial. In: Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections; Seattle, WA2015. pp. 23–26.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    McCormack S, Dunn DT, Desai M, Dolling DI, Gafos M, Gilson R, et al. Pre-exposure prophylaxis to prevent the acquisition of HIV-1 infection (PROUD): effectiveness results from the pilot phase of a pragmatic open-label randomised trial. Lancet. 2016;387(10013):53–60.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Donnell D, Baeten JM, Bumpus NN, Brantley J, Bangsberg DR, Haberer JE, et al. HIV protective efficacy and correlates of tenofovir blood concentrations in a clinical trial of PrEP for HIV prevention. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2014;66(3):340–8.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Anderson PL, Glidden DV, Liu A, Buchbinder S, Lama JR, Guanira JV, et al. Emtricitabine–tenofovir concentrations and pre-exposure prophylaxis efficacy in men who have sex with men. Sci Transl Med. 2012;4(151):151ra25.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Grant RM, Anderson PL, McMahan V, Liu A, Amico KR, Mehrotra M, et al. Uptake of pre-exposure prophylaxis, sexual practices, and HIV incidence in men and transgender women who have sex with men: a cohort study. Lancet Infect Dis. 2014;14(9):820–9.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Laufer FN, O’Connell DA, Feldman I, Zucker HA. vital signs: increased medicaid prescriptions for preexposure prophylaxis against HIV infection—New York, 2012–2015. Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2015;64(46):1296–301.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bush S, Ng L, Magnuson D, Piontkowsky D, Mera Giler R, editors. Significant uptake of Truvada for pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) utilization in the US in late 2014–1Q 2015. In: IAPAC Treatment, Prevention, and Adherence Conference 2015.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Scanlin K, Salcuni P, Edelstein Z, Daskalakis D, Mensah N, Tsoi B, et al. editors. Increasing PrEP use among Men Who Have Sex With Men, New York City 2013–2015. In: Conference on Retroviruses and opportunistic infections. 2016.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Delaney K, Sanchez T, Bowles K, Oraka E, DiNenno E, Sullivan P, editors. Awareness and use of PrEP appear to be increasing among internet samples of US MSM. In: Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections. 2016.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hood JE, Buskin SE, Dombrowski JC, Kern DA, Barash EA, Katzi DA, et al. Dramatic increase in preexposure prophylaxis use among MSM in Washington state. AIDS. 2016;30(3):515–9.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Grant R, Liu A, Hecht J, Buchbinder S, Weber S, Crouch P: Scale-up of preesposure prophylaxis in San Francisco to impact HIV incidence. In: Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections; Seattle, WA; 2015.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Smith DK, Van Handel M, Wolitski RJ, Stryker JE, Hall HI, Prejean J, et al. Vital signs: estimated percentages and numbers of adults with indications for preexposure prophylaxis to prevent HIV acquisition—United States, 2015. MMWR. 2015;64(46):1291–5.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Siegler AJ, Mouhanna F, Giler RM, McCallister S, Yeung H, Jones J, et al: Distribution of active PrEP prescriptions and the PrEP-to-need ratio, US, Q2 2017. In: 25th Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections (CROI 2018); Boston; 2018.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Fisher JD, Fisher WA. Changing AIDS-risk behavior. Psychol Bull. 1992;111(3):455–74.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Fisher JD, Fisher WA, Shuper PA. The information–motivation–behavioral skills model of HIV preventive behavior. Emerg Theor Health Prom Pract Res. 2009;2:21–64.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Johnson BT, Redding CA, DiClemente RJ, Mustanski BS, Dodge B, Sheeran P, et al. A network-individual-resource model for HIV prevention. AIDS Behav. 2010;14(Suppl 2):204–21.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Fisher JD, Fisher WA, Amico KR, Harman JJ. An information–motivation–behavioral skills model of adherence to antiretroviral therapy. Health Psychol. 2006;25(4):462–73.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Fisher WA, Fisher JD, Harman J. The Information-Motivation-Behavioral Skills Model: A general social psychological approach to understanding and promoting health behavior. Social Psychological Foundations of Health and Illness. Hoboken: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.; 2009. p. 82–106.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Fisher WA, Fisher JD, Harman J. The information–motivation–behavioral skills model: a general social psychological approach to understanding and promoting health behavior. Soc Psychol Found Health Illness. 2003;40:82–106.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Dubov A, Altice FL, Fraenkel L. An information–motivation–behavioral skills model of PrEP uptake. AIDS Behav. 2018;22:3603–16.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Krakower DS, Mimiaga MJ, Rosenberger JG, Novak DS, Mitty JA, White JM, et al. Limited awareness and low immediate uptake of pre-exposure prophylaxis among men who have sex with men using an internet social networking site. PLoS ONE. 2012;7(3):e33119.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Garnett M, Hirsch-Moverman Y, Franks J, Hayes-Larson E, El-Sadr WM, Mannheimer S. Limited awareness of pre-exposure prophylaxis among black men who have sex with men and transgender women in New York city. AIDS Care. 2018;30(1):9–17.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Bauermeister JA, Meanley S, Pingel E, Soler JH, Harper GW. PrEP awareness and perceived barriers among single young men who have sex with men. Curr HIV Res. 2013;11(7):520–7.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Goedel WC, Halkitis PN, Greene RE, Duncan DT. Correlates of awareness of and willingness to use pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) in gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men who use geosocial-networking smartphone applications in New York City. AIDS Behav. 2016;20(7):1435–42.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Dolezal C, Frasca T, Giguere R, Ibitoye M, Cranston RD, Febo I, et al. Awareness of post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) and pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is low but interest is high among men engaging in condomless anal sex with men in Boston, Pittsburgh, and San Juan. AIDS Educ Prev. 2015;27(4):289–97.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Eaton LA, Driffin DD, Bauermeister J, Smith H, Conway-Washington C. Minimal awareness and stalled uptake of pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) among at risk, HIV-negative, black men who have sex with men. AIDS Pat Care STDs. 2015;29(8):423–9.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Mosley T, Khaketla M, Armstrong HL, Cui Z, Sereda P, Lachowsky NJ, et al. Trends in awareness and use of HIV PrEP among gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men in Vancouver, Canada 2012–2016. AIDS Behav. 2018;22:3550–65.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Krotchko J, editor. Changes in Awareness of Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) Pre-exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) in High-Risk Populations of Men Who Have Sex With Men (MSM) in Denver Colorado in 2008, 2011, and 2014: Implications for Implementation. Open Forum Infectious Diseases. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2016.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    AIDSVu: Emory University, Rollins School of Public Health. 2018. https://map.aidsvu.org/map?prep=1.
  35. 35.
    Salcuni P, Smolen J, Jain S, Myers J, Edelstein Z. Trends and associations with PrEP prescription among 602 New York City (NYC) ambulatory care practices, 2014–2016. Open Forum Infect Dis. 2017;4(Suppl 1):S21.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Shrestha R, Altice FL, Huedo-Medina TB, Karki P, Copenhaver M. Willingness to use pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP): an empirical test of the information–motivation–behavioral skills (IMB) model among high-risk drug users in treatment. AIDS Behav. 2017;21(5):1299–308.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    King HL, Keller SB, Giancola MA, Rodriguez DA, Chau JJ, Young JA, et al. Pre-exposure prophylaxis accessibility research and evaluation (PrEPARE Study). AIDS Behav. 2014;18(9):1722–5.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Liu A, Cohen S, Follansbee S, Cohan D, Weber S, Sachdev D, et al. Early experiences implementing pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) for HIV prevention in San Francisco. PLoS Med. 2014;11(3):e1001613.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Biello KB, Oldenburg CE, Mitty JA, Closson EF, Mayer KH, Safren SA, et al. The “Safe Sex” conundrum: anticipated stigma from sexual partners as a barrier to PrEP use among substance using MSM engaging in transactional sex. AIDS Behav. 2017;21(1):300–6.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Oldenburg CE, Mitty JA, Biello KB, Closson EF, Safren SA, Mayer KH, et al. Differences in attitudes about HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis use among stimulant versus alcohol using men who have sex with men. AIDS Behav. 2016;20(7):1451–60.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Oldenburg CE, Perez-Brumer AG, Hatzenbuehler M, Krakower DS, Novak DS, Mimiaga MJ, et al. Structural stigma affects access to pre- and post- exposure prophylaxis and HIV risk among men who have sex with men (MSM) in the United States; 2014.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Perez-Figueroa RE, Kapadia F, Barton SC, Eddy JA, Halkitis PN. Acceptability of PrEP uptake among racially/ethnically diverse young men who have sex with men: the P18 study. AIDS Educ Prev. 2015;27(2):112–25.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Garcia J, Parker C, Parker RG, Wilson PA, Philbin M, Hirsch JS. Psychosocial implications of homophobia and HIV stigma in social support networks: insights for high-impact HIV prevention among Black men who have sex with men. Health Educ Behav. 2016;43(2):217–25.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Van der Elst EM, Mbogua J, Operario D, Mutua G, Kuo C, Mugo P, et al. High acceptability of HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis but challenges in adherence and use: qualitative insights from a phase I trial of intermittent and daily PrEP in at-risk populations in Kenya. AIDS Behav. 2013;17(6):2162–72.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Philbin MM, Parker CM, Parker RG, Wilson PA, Garcia J, Hirsch JS. The promise of pre-exposure prophylaxis for Black men who have sex with men: an ecological approach to attitudes, beliefs, and barriers. AIDS Patient Care STDS. 2016;30(6):282–90.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Zarwell M, Payne N, Robinson W, editors. Usage and perceptions of PrEP among men who have sex with men (MSM) in New Orleans, 2014. In: 143rd APHA Annual Meeting and Exposition, Chicago, IL; 2015.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Mantell JE, Sandfort TG, Hoffman S, Guidry JA, Masvawure TB, Cahill S. Knowledge and attitudes about pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) among sexually active men who have sex with men (MSM) participating in New York City Gay Pride events. LGBT Health. 2014;1(2):93–7.Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Koechlin FM, Fonner VA, Dalglish SL, O’Reilly KR, Baggaley R, Grant RM, et al. Values and preferences on the use of oral pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) for HIV prevention among multiple populations: a systematic review of the literature. AIDS Behav. 2017;21(5):1325–35.Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Smith DK, Toledo L, Smith DJ, Adams MA, Rothenberg R. Attitudes and program preferences of African-American urban young adults about pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP). AIDS Educ Prev. 2012;24(5):408–21.Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Galindo GR, Walker JJ, Hazelton P, Lane T, Steward WT, Morin SF, et al. Community member perspectives from transgender women and men who have sex with men on pre-exposure prophylaxis as an HIV prevention strategy: implications for implementation. Implement Sci. 2012;7:116.Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Brooks RA, Landovitz RJ, Regan R, Lee SJ, Allen VC Jr. Perceptions of and intentions to adopt HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis among black men who have sex with men in Los Angeles. Int J STD AIDS. 2015;26(14):1040–8.Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Golub SA, Gamarel KE, Rendina HJ, Surace A, Lelutiu-Weinberger CL. From efficacy to effectiveness: facilitators and barriers to PrEP acceptability and motivations for adherence among MSM and transgender women in New York City. AIDS Patient Care STDs. 2013;27(4):248–54.Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Carey MP, Morrison-Beedy D, Johnson BT. The HIV-Knowledge Questionnaire: development and evaluation of a reliable, valid, and practical self-administered questionnaire. AIDS Behav. 1997;1(1):61–74.Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Helweg-Larsen M, Collins BE. The UCLA Multidimensional Condom Attitudes Scale: documenting the complex determinants of condom use in college students. Health Psychol. 1994;13(3):224–37.Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Fisher TD, Davis CM, Yarber WL, Davis SL. Handbook of sexuality-related measures. London: Routledge; 2013.Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Brown IS. Development of a scale to measure attitude toward the condom as a method of birth control. J Sex Res. 1984;20(3):255–63.Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    St Lawrence JS, Reitman D, Jefferson KW, Alleyne E, Brasfield TL, Shirley A. Factor structure and validation of an adolescent version of the Condom Attitude Scale: an instrument for measuring adolescents’ attitudes toward condoms. Psychol Assess. 1994;6(4):352.Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Donenberg GR, Schwartz RM, Emerson E, Wilson HW, Bryant FB, Coleman G. Applying a cognitive-behavioral model of HIV risk to youths in psychiatric care. AIDS Educ Prev. 2005;17(3):200–16.Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Carey MP, Braaten LS, Maisto SA, Gleason JR, Forsyth AD, Durant LE, et al. Using information, motivational enhancement, and skills training to reduce the risk of HIV infection for low-income urban women: a second randomized clinical trial. Health Psychol. 2000;19(1):3–11.Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    O’Leary A, Jemmott LS, Jemmott JB. Mediation analysis of an effective sexual risk-reduction intervention for women: the importance of self-efficacy. Health Psychol. 2008;27(2s):S180–4.Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Carey MP, Senn TE, Walsh JL, Coury-Doniger P, Urban MA, Fortune T, et al. Evaluating a brief, video-based sexual risk reduction intervention and assessment reactivity with STI clinic patients: results from a randomized controlled trial. AIDS Behav. 2015;19(7):1228–46.Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Rocca CH, Harper CC. Do racial and ethnic differences in contraceptive attitudes and knowledge explain disparities in method use? Persp Sex Reprod Health. 2012;44(3):150–8.Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Graham JW, Taylor BJ, Olchowski AE, Cumsille PE. Planned missing data designs in psychological research. Psychol Methods. 2006;11(4):323–43.Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Schafer JL. Multiple imputation: a primer. Stat Methods Med Res. 1999;8(1):3–15.Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    Clark LA, Watson D. Constructing validity: basic issues in objective scale development. Psychol Assess. 1995;7(3):309.Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    Kline RB. Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York: Guilford Press; 2011.Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Hu L, Bentler PM. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis. Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct Equ Modeling. 1999;6(1):1–55.Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Zedeck S. APA dictionary of statistics and research methods. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association; 2014.Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Bauer DJ. A more general model for testing measurement invariance and differential item functioning. Psychol Methods. 2017;22(3):507–26.Google Scholar
  70. 70.
    Little TD, Cunningham WA, Shahar G, Widaman KF. To parcel or not to parcel: exploring the question, weighing the merits. Struct Equ Modeling. 2002;9(2):151–73.Google Scholar
  71. 71.
    Muthén LK, Muthén BO. Mplus user’s guide. Los Angeles: Muthén & Muthén; 1998.Google Scholar
  72. 72.
    Tofighi D, MacKinnon DP. RMediation: an R package for mediation analysis confidence intervals. Behav Res Methods. 2011;43(3):692–700.Google Scholar
  73. 73.
    Hoots BE, Finlayson T, Nerlander L, Paz-Bailey G. Willingness to take, use of, and indications for pre-exposure prophylaxis among men who have sex with Men-20 US Cities, 2014. Clin Infect Dis. 2016;63(5):672–7.Google Scholar
  74. 74.
    Mera R, McCallister S, Palmer B, Mayer G, Magnuson D, Rawlings M. FTC/TDF (Truvada) for HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) utilization in the United States: 2012–2015. Foster City, CA, USA. 2016.Google Scholar
  75. 75.
    Fisher JD, Fisher WA, Williams SS, Malloy TE. Empirical tests of an information-motivation-behavioral skills model of AIDS-preventive behavior with gay men and heterosexual university students. Health Psychol. 1994;13(3):238.Google Scholar
  76. 76.
    Kalichman SC, Picciano JF, Roffman RA. Motivation to reduce HIV risk behaviors in the context of the information, motivation and behavioral skills (IMB) model of HIV prevention. J Health Psychol. 2008;13(5):680–9.Google Scholar
  77. 77.
    Mustanski B, Donenberg G, Emerson E. I can use a condom, I just don’t: the importance of motivation to prevent HIV in adolescent seeking psychiatric care. AIDS Behav. 2006;10(6):753–62.Google Scholar
  78. 78.
    Robertson AA, Stein JA, Baird-Thomas C. Gender differences in the prediction of condom use among incarcerated juvenile offenders: testing the information-motivation-behavior skills (IMB) model. J Adoles Health. 2006;38(1):18–25.Google Scholar
  79. 79.
    Walsh JL, Senn TE, Scott-Sheldon LA, Vanable PA, Carey MP. Predicting condom use using the Information-Motivation-Behavioral Skills (IMB) model: a multivariate latent growth curve analysis. Ann Behav Med. 2011;42(2):235.Google Scholar
  80. 80.
    Petroll AE, Walsh JL, Owczarzak JL, McAuliffe TL, Bogart LM, Kelly JA. PrEP awareness, familiarity, comfort, and prescribing experience among US primary care providers and HIV specialists. AIDS Behav. 2017;21(5):1256–67.Google Scholar
  81. 81.
    Raifman JR, Flynn C, German D. Healthcare provider contact and pre-exposure prophylaxis in Baltimore men who have sex with men. Am J Prev Med. 2017;52(1):55–63.Google Scholar
  82. 82.
    Pulsipher C, Montoya J, Plant A, Curtis P, Holloway I, Leibowitz A. Addressing PrEP disparities among young gay and bisexual men in California. California: California HIV/AIDS Policy Research Centers; 2016.Google Scholar
  83. 83.
    Bogorodskaya M, Avery A. Favorable attitudes but low awareness and restricted access to pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) against human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) in an urban midwestern community. Open Forum Infectious Dis. 2016;3:506.Google Scholar
  84. 84.
    Sheeran P, Abraham C, Orbell S. Psychosocial correlates of heterosexual condom use: a meta-analysis. Psychol Bull. 1999;125(1):90–132.Google Scholar
  85. 85.
    Kalichman SC, Simbayi LC. HIV testing attitudes, AIDS stigma, and voluntary HIV counselling and testing in a black township in Cape Town, South Africa. Sex Trans Infect. 2003;79(6):442–7.Google Scholar
  86. 86.
    Fortenberry JD, McFarlane M, Bleakley A, Bull S, Fishbein M, Grimley DM, et al. Relationships of stigma and shame to gonorrhea and HIV screening. Am J Public Health. 2002;92(3):378–81.Google Scholar
  87. 87.
    Kellerman SE, Lehman JS, Lansky A, Stevens MR, Hecht FM, Bindman AB, et al. HIV testing within at-risk populations in the United States and the reasons for seeking or avoiding HIV testing. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2002;31(2):202–10.Google Scholar
  88. 88.
    Amico KR, Toro-Alfonso J, Fisher JD. An empirical test of the information, motivation and behavioral skills model of antiretroviral therapy adherence. AIDS Care. 2005;17(6):661–73.Google Scholar
  89. 89.
    Starace F, Massa A, Amico KR, Fisher JD. Adherence to antiretroviral therapy: an empirical test of the information-motivation-behavioral skills model. Health Psychol. 2006;25(2):153–62.Google Scholar
  90. 90.
    Calabrese SK, Underhill K. How stigma surrounding the use of HIV preexposure prophylaxis undermines prevention and pleasure: a call to destigmatize “truvada whores”. Am J public Health. 2015;105(10):1960–4.Google Scholar
  91. 91.
    Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Talk PrEP Atlanta: CDC; 2017. https://www.cdc.gov/actagainstaids/campaigns/starttalking/prep.html. Accessed 22 May 2017
  92. 92.
    Strauss BB, Greene GJ, Phillips G 2nd, Bhatia R, Madkins K, Parsons JT, et al. Exploring patterns of awareness and use of HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis among young men who have sex with men. AIDS Behav. 2016;21(5):1288–98.Google Scholar
  93. 93.
    Chan PA, Mena L, Patel R, Oldenburg CE, Beauchamps L, Perez-Brumer AG, et al. Retention in care outcomes for HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis implementation programmes among men who have sex with men in three US cities. J Int AIDS Soc. 2016;19(1):20903.Google Scholar
  94. 94.
    Underhill K, Morrow KM, Colleran CM, Holcomb R, Operario D, Calabrese SK, et al. Access to healthcare, HIV/STI testing, and preferred pre-exposure prophylaxis providers among men who have sex with men and men who engage in street-based sex work in the US. PLoS ONE. 2014;9(11):e112425.Google Scholar
  95. 95.
    Maloney KM, Krakower DS, Ziobro D, Rosenberger JG, Novak D, Mayer KH. Culturally competent sexual healthcare as a prerequisite for obtaining preexposure prophylaxis: findings from a qualitative study. LGBT Health. 2017;4(4):310–4.Google Scholar
  96. 96.
    Eaton LA, Driffin DD, Smith H, Conway-Washington C, White D, Cherry C. Psychosocial factors related to willingness to use pre-exposure prophylaxis for HIV prevention among Black men who have sex with men attending a community event. Sex Health. 2014;11(3):244–51.Google Scholar
  97. 97.
    Krakower D, Oldenburg C, Mimiaga M, Novak D, Rosenberger J, Elsesser S, et al., editors. Patient-provider communication about sexual behaviors and preexposure prophylaxis: results from a national online survey of men who have sex with men in the United States. Poster presented at the 8th International AIDS Society Conference on HIV Pathogenesis, Treatment & Prevention, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada; 2015.Google Scholar
  98. 98.
    Berendes S, Rimal RN. Addressing the slow uptake of HIV testing in Malawi: the role of stigma, self-efficacy, and knowledge in the Malawi BRIDGE Project. J Assoc Nurses AIDS Care. 2011;22(3):215–28.Google Scholar
  99. 99.
    Gifford AL, Bormann JE, Shively MJ, Wright BC, Richman DD, Bozzette SA. Predictors of self-reported adherence and plasma HIV concentrations in patients on multidrug antiretroviral regimens. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2000;23(5):386–95.Google Scholar
  100. 100.
    Barclay TR, Hinkin CH, Castellon SA, Mason KI, Reinhard MJ, Marion SD, et al. Age-associated predictors of medication adherence in HIV-positive adults: health beliefs, self-efficacy, and neurocognitive status. Health Psychol. 2007;26(1):40–9.Google Scholar

Copyright information

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

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Medicine, Center for AIDS Intervention ResearchThe Medical College of WisconsinMilwaukeeUSA

Personalised recommendations