Cargando…
What Proportion of Female Sex Workers Practise anal Intercourse and How Frequently? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
HIV is more efficiently acquired during receptive anal intercourse (AI) compared to vaginal intercourse (VI) and may contribute substantially to female sex workers’ (FSW) high HIV burden. We aim to determine how common and frequent AI is among FSW globally. We searched PubMed, Embase and PsycINFO fo...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer US
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6778486/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30953304 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10461-019-02477-w |
_version_ | 1783456773098700800 |
---|---|
author | Owen, Branwen Nia Baggaley, Rebecca F. Elmes, Jocelyn Harvey, Amy Shubber, Zara Butler, Ailsa R. Silhol, Romain Anton, Peter Shacklett, Barbara van der Straten, Ariane Boily, Marie-Claude |
author_facet | Owen, Branwen Nia Baggaley, Rebecca F. Elmes, Jocelyn Harvey, Amy Shubber, Zara Butler, Ailsa R. Silhol, Romain Anton, Peter Shacklett, Barbara van der Straten, Ariane Boily, Marie-Claude |
author_sort | Owen, Branwen Nia |
collection | PubMed |
description | HIV is more efficiently acquired during receptive anal intercourse (AI) compared to vaginal intercourse (VI) and may contribute substantially to female sex workers’ (FSW) high HIV burden. We aim to determine how common and frequent AI is among FSW globally. We searched PubMed, Embase and PsycINFO for studies reporting the proportion of FSW practising AI (prevalence) and/or the number of AI acts (frequency) worldwide from 01/1980 to 10/2018. We assessed the influence of participant and study characteristics on AI prevalence (e.g. continent, study year and interview method) through sub-group analysis. Of 15,830 identified studies, 131 were included. Nearly all (N = 128) reported AI prevalence and few frequency (N = 13), over various recall periods. Most studies used face-to-face interviews (N = 111). Pooled prevalences varied little by recall period (lifetime: 15.7% 95%CI 12.2–19.3%, N = 30, I(2) = 99%; past month: 16.2% 95%CI 10.8–21.6%, N = 18, I(2) = 99%). The pooled proportion of FSW reporting < 100% condom use tended to be non-significantly higher during AI compared to during VI (e.g. any unprotected VI: 19.1% 95%CI 1.7–36.4, N = 5 and any unprotected AI: 46.4% 95%CI 9.1–83.6, N = 5 in the past week). Across all study participants, between 2.4 and 15.9% (N = 6) of all intercourse acts (AI and VI) were anal. Neither AI prevalence nor frequency varied substantially by any participant or study characteristics. Although varied, AI among FSW is generally common, inconsistently protected with condoms and practiced sufficiently frequently to contribute substantially to HIV acquisition in this risk group. Interventions to address barriers to condom use are needed. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s10461-019-02477-w) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6778486 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | Springer US |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-67784862020-02-28 What Proportion of Female Sex Workers Practise anal Intercourse and How Frequently? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Owen, Branwen Nia Baggaley, Rebecca F. Elmes, Jocelyn Harvey, Amy Shubber, Zara Butler, Ailsa R. Silhol, Romain Anton, Peter Shacklett, Barbara van der Straten, Ariane Boily, Marie-Claude AIDS Behav Substantive Review HIV is more efficiently acquired during receptive anal intercourse (AI) compared to vaginal intercourse (VI) and may contribute substantially to female sex workers’ (FSW) high HIV burden. We aim to determine how common and frequent AI is among FSW globally. We searched PubMed, Embase and PsycINFO for studies reporting the proportion of FSW practising AI (prevalence) and/or the number of AI acts (frequency) worldwide from 01/1980 to 10/2018. We assessed the influence of participant and study characteristics on AI prevalence (e.g. continent, study year and interview method) through sub-group analysis. Of 15,830 identified studies, 131 were included. Nearly all (N = 128) reported AI prevalence and few frequency (N = 13), over various recall periods. Most studies used face-to-face interviews (N = 111). Pooled prevalences varied little by recall period (lifetime: 15.7% 95%CI 12.2–19.3%, N = 30, I(2) = 99%; past month: 16.2% 95%CI 10.8–21.6%, N = 18, I(2) = 99%). The pooled proportion of FSW reporting < 100% condom use tended to be non-significantly higher during AI compared to during VI (e.g. any unprotected VI: 19.1% 95%CI 1.7–36.4, N = 5 and any unprotected AI: 46.4% 95%CI 9.1–83.6, N = 5 in the past week). Across all study participants, between 2.4 and 15.9% (N = 6) of all intercourse acts (AI and VI) were anal. Neither AI prevalence nor frequency varied substantially by any participant or study characteristics. Although varied, AI among FSW is generally common, inconsistently protected with condoms and practiced sufficiently frequently to contribute substantially to HIV acquisition in this risk group. Interventions to address barriers to condom use are needed. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s10461-019-02477-w) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Springer US 2019-04-05 2020 /pmc/articles/PMC6778486/ /pubmed/30953304 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10461-019-02477-w Text en © The Author(s) 2019 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. |
spellingShingle | Substantive Review Owen, Branwen Nia Baggaley, Rebecca F. Elmes, Jocelyn Harvey, Amy Shubber, Zara Butler, Ailsa R. Silhol, Romain Anton, Peter Shacklett, Barbara van der Straten, Ariane Boily, Marie-Claude What Proportion of Female Sex Workers Practise anal Intercourse and How Frequently? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis |
title | What Proportion of Female Sex Workers Practise anal Intercourse and How Frequently? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis |
title_full | What Proportion of Female Sex Workers Practise anal Intercourse and How Frequently? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis |
title_fullStr | What Proportion of Female Sex Workers Practise anal Intercourse and How Frequently? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | What Proportion of Female Sex Workers Practise anal Intercourse and How Frequently? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis |
title_short | What Proportion of Female Sex Workers Practise anal Intercourse and How Frequently? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis |
title_sort | what proportion of female sex workers practise anal intercourse and how frequently? a systematic review and meta-analysis |
topic | Substantive Review |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6778486/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30953304 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10461-019-02477-w |
work_keys_str_mv | AT owenbranwennia whatproportionoffemalesexworkerspractiseanalintercourseandhowfrequentlyasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT baggaleyrebeccaf whatproportionoffemalesexworkerspractiseanalintercourseandhowfrequentlyasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT elmesjocelyn whatproportionoffemalesexworkerspractiseanalintercourseandhowfrequentlyasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT harveyamy whatproportionoffemalesexworkerspractiseanalintercourseandhowfrequentlyasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT shubberzara whatproportionoffemalesexworkerspractiseanalintercourseandhowfrequentlyasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT butlerailsar whatproportionoffemalesexworkerspractiseanalintercourseandhowfrequentlyasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT silholromain whatproportionoffemalesexworkerspractiseanalintercourseandhowfrequentlyasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT antonpeter whatproportionoffemalesexworkerspractiseanalintercourseandhowfrequentlyasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT shacklettbarbara whatproportionoffemalesexworkerspractiseanalintercourseandhowfrequentlyasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT vanderstratenariane whatproportionoffemalesexworkerspractiseanalintercourseandhowfrequentlyasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT boilymarieclaude whatproportionoffemalesexworkerspractiseanalintercourseandhowfrequentlyasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis |