» Articles » PMID: 39004714

Perception of Couples' on Multipurpose Prevention Technology Attribute Choice: the Case of MTN 045

Overview
Publisher Biomed Central
Specialty Public Health
Date 2024 Jul 14
PMID 39004714
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Multipurpose prevention technologies (MPTs) are products capable of simultaneously addressing multiple sexual and reproductive health needs such as unwanted pregnancy, STIs including HIV-1, and other reproductive tract infections. MPTs are urgently needed to address the double burden of unplanned pregnancy and HIV. While condoms are currently the only accessible MPTs, they are not solely under a woman's control, and female condoms face limitations due to poor acceptability and high cost.

Methods: We conducted a sub-analysis of qualitative data from 39 couples participating in the MTN 045 study to examine the perception of couples on choice and acceptability of a "2 in 1" MPT that combines HIV and pregnancy prevention.

Results: Couples recognized the benefits of MPTs for HIV and pregnancy prevention but perceptions tied to each indication and a novel prevention technology tool raised important concerns relevant to use of future MPTs. In the study, participants' perceptions of MPT use were influenced by pregnancy planning. When the timing was less critical, they prioritized HIV prevention. Misinformation about family planning methods, including MPTs, affected decision-making with potential to hinder uptake of future MPTs. Concerns about side effects, such as weight gain and hormonal imbalances, influenced willingness to use MPTs.

Conclusion: Addressing the myths and misconceptions surrounding the use of contraceptives is crucial in promoting their acceptance and ultimate use. Strategies for addressing the drawbacks women might experience while using a particular product should be in place as new MPTs progress through the development pipeline and approach roll-out.

References
1.
Shapley-Quinn M, Laborde N, Luecke E, Hoesley C, Salata R, Johnson S . Acceptability of the Dapivirine Vaginal Ring in Postmenopausal US Women. AIDS Patient Care STDS. 2022; 36(3):97-105. PMC: 8971982. DOI: 10.1089/apc.2022.0002. View

2.
Frost J, Darroch J . Factors associated with contraceptive choice and inconsistent method use, United States, 2004. Perspect Sex Reprod Health. 2008; 40(2):94-104. DOI: 10.1363/4009408. View

3.
Quaife M, Eakle R, Cabrera Escobar M, Vickerman P, Kilbourne-Brook M, Mvundura M . Divergent Preferences for HIV Prevention: A Discrete Choice Experiment for Multipurpose HIV Prevention Products in South Africa. Med Decis Making. 2017; 38(1):120-133. DOI: 10.1177/0272989X17729376. View

4.
Minnis A, Etima J, Musara P, Browne E, Mutero P, Kemigisha D . Couples' Preferences for "2 in 1" Multipurpose Prevention Technologies to Prevent Both HIV and Pregnancy: Results of a Discrete Choice Experiment in Uganda and Zimbabwe. AIDS Behav. 2022; 26(12):3848-3861. PMC: 9175528. DOI: 10.1007/s10461-022-03713-6. View

5.
Baeten J, Palanee-Phillips T, Brown E, Schwartz K, Soto-Torres L, Govender V . Use of a Vaginal Ring Containing Dapivirine for HIV-1 Prevention in Women. N Engl J Med. 2016; 375(22):2121-2132. PMC: 4993693. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1506110. View