INTRODUCTION
METHODS
Data Sources
Study Selection
Quality Assessment
RESULTS
Study Design and Quality
Reference | Design | Target | Location | Intervention | Sample Size | Follow-up (mo.) | Race | BMO*
| Results | Score |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Digital Delivery | ||||||||||
Boekeloo et al.55
| RCT | Adolescents | Washington, DC | Single, didactic + interactive, 1-on-1 session | 215 | 3, 9 | AA: 65 %, O: 13 %, L: 3 % | - | Sexually active intervention participants with greater condom use at 3 months (OR 18.01; 95 % CI: 1.27, 256.03), and fewer self-reported STI symptoms (0 %) than the control group (7 %) at 9 months (p = 0.02). | 26 |
DeLamater et al.34
| RCT | Adolescents (M) | Milwaukee, WI | 1)Single, didactic, 1-on-1 session; 2)1 + skills (health worker delivered) | 562 | 1, 6 | AA: 100 % | - | At posttest, 18 % of total participants reported consistent condom use with their steady partners, which increased to 51 % at 6 months. Among those with casual partners, the percentages were 26 % and 50 %, respectively. | 20 |
Downs et al.56
| RCT | Adolescents (F) | Pittsburg, PA | Single, didactic + interactive, 1-on-1 session | 300 | 1, 3, 6 | AA: 75 %, O: 10 % | + | There was no difference in condom use between conditions from baseline to 3 months [F(1,213) =0.33; p = 0.57] nor from 3 to 6 months [F(1,213) =2.13; p = 0.15). At 6 months, however, intervention participants were less likely have been diagnosed with an STI (OR 2.79; p = 0.05). | 20 |
Roye et al.57
| RCT | Adolescents (F) | New York, NY | 1) Single, didactic, 1-on-1 session; 2) Single, interactive, 1-on-1 session (health worker delivered); 3) 1 + 2 | 400 | 3, 12 | L: 55 %, AA: 45 % | - | Intervention 3 group reported 2.5 times more condom use at last sex than the control group (χ2 = 3.46; p = 0.05). No effect was found for incident STI rate. | 25 |
Peer Delivery | ||||||||||
DiClemente et al.27
| RCT | Adolescents (F) | Birmingham, AL | Multi, didactic + interactive + skills, group sessions | 522 | 6, 12 | AA: 100 % | + | The intervention group reported more consistent condom use (AOR 2.30; 95 % CI: 1.51, 3.50; p < 0.001) and a lower rate of clymadial infection (OR 0.17; 95 % CI: 0.03, 0.92; p = 0.04) than the control group over the 12 month follow up. | 29 |
DiClemente et al.58
| RCT | Pregnant adolescents (F) | Atlanta, GA | Multi, didactic + interactive + skills, group sessions | 311 | 12 | AA: 100 % | - | Intervention participants reported greater condom use at last intercourse (AOR 3.9; 95 % CI: 1.00, 15.71; p = 0.05) and consistent condom use (AOR 7.9; 95 % CI: 1.00, 56.7; p = 0.05) at follow up. | 28 |
Prado et al.59
| RCT | Adolescents | Miami, FL | Parent delivered (training by health workers); Multi, interactive, group sessions | 266 | 6, 12, 24, 36 | L: 100 % | - | The intervention group reported more condom use at last intercourse (19.2 %) than the control group (44.4 %; χ2 = 3.87; p < 0.05). | 22 |
Health Worker Delivery | ||||||||||
DiClemente et al.28
| RCT | Adolescents (F) | Atlanta, GA | Multi, didactic + interactive, group sessions | 715 | 6, 12 | AA: 100 % | + | The intervention group had a lower rate of chlamydial infection (RR 0.65; 95 % CI: 0.42, 0.98; p = 0.04) and a higher proportion of condom use at 12 month follow up (mean difference 10.84; 95 % CI: 5.27, 16.42; p = 0.001) | 25 |
Jemmott et al.60
| RCT | Adolescents (M) | Philadelphia, PA | Single, didactic + interactive, group sessions | 157 | 3 | AA: 100 % | - | Risk data reported in aggregate (i.e. multiple partners, condom use, anal intercourse). Intervention group risk score was lower than control group at 3 months (F = 6.48; p < 0.01). | 20 |
Jemmott et al.61
| RCT | Adolescents (F) | Philadelphia, PA | 1)Single, didactic + interactive + Skills, group session; 2) 1 + no skills training | 682 | 3,6, 12 | AA: 68 %, L: 32 % | + | Over 12 months, the Intervention 1 group reported fewer unprotected sex acts (mean 2.27; SE 0.81) than Intervention 2 (4.04, SE 0.80; p = 0.03) or control group (5.05; SE 0.81; p = 0.002), and had a lower incident STI rate (mean 10.5 %; SE 2.9 %) than the controls (18.2 %; SE 2.8 %; p = 0.05). | 27 |
Jemmott et al.62
| RCT | Adolescents | Philadelphia, PA | Multi, didactic + interactive, group sessions | 1707 | 3, 6, 12 | AA: 90 % | - | Intervention group with more consistent condom use (OR 1.39; 95 % CI: 1.06, 1.85) and higher proportion of protected sex (β = 0.06; 95 % CI: 0.00, 0.12) at 12 months. | 27 |
Lesser et al.63
| RCT | Adolescent parents | Los Angeles, CA | Multi, didactic + interactive + skills, group sessions | 336 | 3, 6 | L: 78 % male, 86 % female | - | Less unprotected sex was reported by females (effect estimate -0.192; SE 0.056; p = 0.002) and males (effect estimate -0.082; SE 0.037; p = 0.031) of the intervention group over 6 months. | 23 |
Orr et al.64
| RCT | Adolescents (F) | Indianapolis, IN | Single, interactive, 1-on-1 session | 219 | ½, 6 | AA: 55 % | + | The intervention group reported higher condom during vaginal intercourse (OR 3.1; 95 % CI: 1.4, 6.8; p = 0.005) than the control group, however no significant difference was found in incident STI rate (26 % vs. 17 %; p = 0.30) | 21 |
Rotheram-Borus et al.65
| RCT | Adolescents | New York, NY | Multi, didactic + interactive + skills, group + 1-on-1 sessions | 311 | 3, 6, 12, 18, 24 | AA: 59 %, L: 26 % | - | Intervention females reported lower unprotected sex than control females at 24 months (OR 0.35; p = 0.018). No significant change was found among males. | 24 |
St Lawrence et al.26
| RCT | Adolescents | Jackson, MS | Multi, didactic + interactive + skills, group sessions | 246 | 6, 12 | AA: 100 % | - | Both conditions saw a decline in condom use over the 12 month follow up, although the proportion of protected sex acts was higher in the intervention group compared to the control groups at all follow up points [F(1,134) = 5.94; p
< 0.05]. | 24 |
Reference | Design | Target | Location | Intervention | Sample Size | Follow-up (mo.) | Race | BMO*
| Results | Score |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Peer Delivery | ||||||||||
Gollub et al.66
| RCT | Drug users (F) | New York, NY; Philadelphia, PA; Providence, RI | Multi, interactive, group sessions. | 189 | 2 | AA: 68 %, O: 8 % | - | Intervention group with increase in mean monthly condom use (mean increase 1.13 uses/month for male condoms and 0.77 uses/month for female condoms; p < 0.001). | 17 |
Cottler et al.67
| RCT | Out-of-treatment drug users | St. Louis, MO | Multi, didactic + interactive, group sessions | 725 | 3,6,9,12 | AA: 93 % | - | Both cohorts demonstrated a decrease in condom use over time; no significant difference between groups (43 % of intervention cohort with improved condom use vs. 44 % of control). | 22 |
Health Worker Delivery | ||||||||||
Avins et al.68
| Pre/Post | Alcohol dependents | San Francisco, CA | Standard HIV education at alcohol abuse treatment centers | 700 | 13 | AA: 50 %, L: 13 %, O: 5 % | - | Participants increased consistent condom use with multiple partners (RR 1.77; p < 0.01). | 20 |
Deren et al.69
| RCT | Injection drug users and their sex partners | Harlem, NY | 1) Single, didactic, group session; 2) Multi, didactic + skills, group sessions 3) No intervention | 1770 | 6 | AA: 100 % | + | All three interventions yielded an increase in condom [RR 2.1, 2.5, and 1.8, respectively, comparing pre- to post-intervention condom use of IDUs with main partners; 1.5, 1.6, and 1.4 with multiple partners; 1.5, 2.0, and 1.4 for their sexual partners with multiple partners; p < 0.001)] No difference between intervention groups, or between drug users and sex partners. | 16 |
Gibson et al.70
| RCT | Heroin detoxify-cation clients | San Francisco, CA | 1) Single, interactive + skills, 1-on-1 session; 2) 1 + VCT | 404 | 1) 3, 12; 2) 6, 12 | AA: 32 %, L: 20 % | - | No significant difference in proportion reporting 100 % condom use at 12 months between intervention and control groups in either Intervention 1 (pre/post RR 1.8 vs. 1.) or 2 (RR 2.4 vs. 0.9). | 26 |
Harris et al.71
| RCT | Methadone-maintained drug users (F) | Baltimore, MD | Multi, didactic, group sessions. | 204 | 2, 4, 7 | AA: 100 % | - | Intervention group with greater increase in condom use [F(1,127) = 4.87; p = 0.029] over 7 months. | 25 |
Koblin et al.72
| RCT | Non-injection drug users (F) | New York, NY | Multi, didactic + interactive + skills, group sessions. | 311 | 1, 6, 12 | AA: 66 %, L: 24 %, O: 10 % | - | All participants with increased condom use at 6 and 12 months for both groups (exact numbers not provided; p < 0.001); no significant difference between groups. | 24 |
Kotranski et al.73
| RCT | Out-of-treatment drug users | Philadelphia, PA | Multi, didactic + interactive, group + 1-on-1 sessions | 684 | 6 | AA: 85 % | - | Control group with greater reduction in unprotected vaginal sex (75 % to 42 % in control vs. 75 % to 52 % in intervention; pre/post RR 0.6 for control and RR 0.7 for intervention; p = 0.05). | 24 |
Latkin et al.74
| RCT | Drug users | Baltimore, MD | Multi, interactive + skills, group sessions | 250 | 6 | AA: 94 % | - | Intervention group more likely to report increase in condom use with casual partners (18 % vs. 5 %; p < 0.05). | 25 |
Malow et al.75
| RCT | Drug users (M) | New Orleans, LA | Multi, interactive + skills, group sessions | 152 | 3 | AA: 100 % | - | Both cohorts reduced high-risk behavior (defined as >1 sex partner AND less than 100 % condom use) at 3 months (75 % to 32 % in intervention and 75 % to 48 % in controls; χ2 = 25.35; p < 0.001). No significant difference between groups. | 20 |
Malow et al.76
| RCT | Non-injection drug users (F) | Miami, FL | Multi, interactive + skills, group sessions | 41 | 3 | AA: 69 %, L: 14 % | - | Risk data reported in aggregate. HIV-negative intervention group members with increase in mean proportion of condom or microbicide use (0.14 to 0.35; sign test, N = 12, x = 0 p < 0.001); no significant difference between groups (Kruskal-Wallis one-way analysis of variance, H = 1.32). | 21 |
Robles et al.†77
| Pre/Post | Drug users | Multicity | Multi, interactive + skills, groups sessions | 981 | 6, 9 | AA: 86 % | - | HIV positive participants reduced frequency of unprotected vaginal sex at follow-up compared with HIV negative individuals (OR 0.2; p ≤ 0.05) | 20 |
Schilling et al.78
| RCT | Drug users (F) | Bronx, NY | Multi, interactive + skills, group sessions | 91 | 3 | L: 64 %, AA: 36 % | - | Intervention group with higher frequency of condom use (2.6 vs. 1.8; p = 0.001). | 24 |
Reference | Design | Target | Region | Intervention | Sample Size | Follow-up (mo.) | Race | BMO*
| Results | Score |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Digital Delivery | ||||||||||
Artz et al.79
| Pre/Post | STD clinic patients (F) | Birmingham, AL | Single, didactic + skills, 1-on-1 session | 1159 | 6 | AA: 84 % | - | The increase in condom use was significant for women who reported sexual activity in the 30 days before and after intervention (N = 702; χ2 = 254.9; p < 0.001). | 22 |
Grimley and Hook42
| RCT | STD clinic patients | Birmingham, AL | Single, interactive, 1-on-1 session | 430 | 6 | AA: 89 %, O: 2 % | + | Intervention group more likely to report using condoms 100 % of the time compared to control group (32 % vs. 23 %; Χ2 = 2.34, p = 0.03), and with lower STI incidence (OR 1.91; 95 % CI; 1.09, 3.34; p = 0.04) at 6 months. | 25 |
Kalichman and Cherry80
| RCT | STD clinic patients (M) | Georgia | Single, didactic + skills, group session promoting 1) male latex condoms; 2) male polyurethane condoms | 106 | 1,3 | AA: 100 % | - | Higher condom use in intervention group compared to control group at 1 month (F = 5.6; p < 0.01), but no significant difference between conditions at 3 or 6 months. | 26 |
Kalichman et al.41
| RCT | STD clinic patients | Atlanta, GA | Multi, didactic + interactive + skills, groups sessions | 117 | 3, 6 | AA: 100 % | - | The intervention group had higher condom use rates [F(l, 66) = 5.38, p < 0.05, d = 0.55] relative to the controls at 3 months. No differences between conditions were seen at 6 months. | 22 |
Warner et al.39
| RCT | STD clinic patients | Denver, CO; Long Beach, CA; San Francisco, CA | Single, didactic, group session | 8635 | 14.8 (mean) | L: 25 %, AA: 18 %, O: 11 % | +† | Intervention group with lower rate of incident STI (HR 0.91; 95 % CI: 0.84, 0.99). | 23 |
Wenger et al.81
| RCT | STD clinic patients | (Los Angeles, CA) | Single, didactic + interactive, 1-on-1 session | 186 | 2 | AA: 87 % | - | Greater increase in condom use with last partner in intervention (10 % to 27 %) than control group (11 % to 13 %; p = 0.05) | 24 |
Peer Delivery | ||||||||||
Crosby et al.82
| RCT | STD clinic patients (M) | Kentucky | Single, interactive + skills, 1-on-1 session | 266 | 3, 6 | AA: 100 % | + | Intervention group with higher rate of condom use at last sexual encounter (AOR estimate 0.32; 95 % CI: 0.12, 0.86; p = 0.02) and fewer incident STIs at 6 months (AOR estimate 2.20; 95 % CI: 1.08, 4.48; p = 0.03) | 26 |
Health Worker Delivery | ||||||||||
Boyer et al.83
| RCT | STD clinic patients | San Francisco, CA | Multi, didactic + interactive, 1-on-1 sessions | 399 | 3, 5 | L: 42 %, AA: 38 %, | + | The intervention group showed a greater decrease in unprotected sex than the control group (χ2 = 4.43, p < 0.05) at 3 months. There was no difference between groups in STI incidence by men (χ2 = 0.28; p > 0.20) or women (χ2 = 0.74, p > 0.20) at 6 months. | 23 |
Branson et al.84
| RCT | STD clinic patients | Houston, TX | Multi, didactic + interactive + skills, group sessions | 964 | 2, 6, 9, 12 | AA: 90 %, O: 4 % | +† | No significant difference in STI incidence was found between the control (27 %) and intervention (26 %) groups (p > 0.15). | 24 |
Carey et al.85
| RCT | STD clinic patients | Upstate New York | 1) Multi, didactic + interactive, 1-on-1 + group sessions; 2) 1+ skills; 3) Multi, interactive, 1-on-1 + groups; 4) 3 + skills | 1483 | 3, 6, 12 | AA: 64 %; O: 12 % | +† | A decrease in unprotected sex acts and incident STIs were not sustained over the full 12 months, and no differences were found between intervention conditions. However at 3 months, unprotected sex events decreased from 17.2 to 11.8 (p < 0.0001), and the odds of an STI also decreased (OR 0.87; 95 % CI: 0.79, 0.95; p < 0.001). | 23 |
Kalichman et al.86
| RCT | STD clinic patients (F) | Atlanta, GA | Single, didactic + interactive + skills, group sessions | 105 | 1, 3 | AA: 100 % | - | The intervention group was less likely to request female and male condoms than the control group (26 % vs. 1 %; 8 % vs. 19 % respectively; p < 0.01). | 22 |
Kamb et al.37
| RCT | STD clinic patients | Baltimore, MD; Denver, CO; Long Beach, CA; Newark, NJ; San Francisco, CA | 1) Multi, didactic + interactive, 1-on-1 sessions; 2) Multi, enhanced VCT, 1-on-1 sessions | 5758 | 3, 6, 8, 12 | AA: 59 %, L: 19 %, O: 6 % | +† | The incident STI rate was 14.6 % in the control group, compared to 11.5 % among Intervention 1 (RR 0.78; 95 % CI: 0.64, 0.94) and 12.0 % among Intervention 2 (RR 0.81; 95 % CI: 0.67, 0.98) participants. 0 incident HIV in Intervention 2, compared to 4 incident HIV in Intervention group 1, and 4 in control (p = 0.06). | 25 |
Metcalf et al.87
| RCT | STD clinic patients | Denver, CO; Long Beach, CA; Newark, NJ | Single-visit VCT (Rapid test intervention group; 2-visit VCT control group) | 3297 | 3, 6, 9, 12 | AA: 51 %, L: 18 % | +† | Rates of unprotected sex were similar between groups at 3 months (control 62.5 %; intervention 64.2 %, RR 1.03; 95 % CI: 0.97, 1.09). Men in the intervention group had a significantly higher incidence of STIs than those in the standard-test group over 12 months (RR 1.34; 95 % CI: 1.06, 1.70; P <0.02). | 22 |
Metcalf et al.88
| RCT | STD clinic patients | Denver, CO; Long Beach, CA; Newark, NJ | VCT + Single, interactive, 1-on-1 booster session | 3297 | 3, 6, 9, 12 | AA: 51 %, L: 18 % | + | Incident STIs were detected in 8.8 % of the control group and 8.5 % of the intervention group at 12 months (RR 0.97; 95 % CI: 0.78, 1.22). | 21 |
O'Leary et al.89
| RCT | STD clinic patients | Maryland, Georgia, New Jersey | Multi, didactic + interactive, group sessions | 659 | 3 | AA: 91 %, L: 3 % | - | Condom use increased in the control and intervention groups, with no difference in the proportion of condom use at 3 months (50 % for both groups). | 18 |
Shain et al.90
| RCT | STD clinic patients (F) | San Antonio, TX | Multi, didactic + interactive, group sessions | 549 | 6, 12 | L: 69 %, AA: 31 % | +† | The frequency of unprotected sex at 12 months was 79.8 % in the control and 70.3 % in the intervention group (p = 0.03). The incident STI rate through 12 months was 26.9 % in the control and 16.8 % in intervention group (RR 0.52; 95 % CI: 0.34, 0.81). | 21 |
Reference | Design | Target | Region | Intervention | Sample Size | Follow-up (mo.) | Race | BMO* | Results | Score |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Peer Delivered | ||||||||||
Somerville et al.24
| Pre/Post | MSM | Vista, CA | MSM trained to disseminate HIV/STI prevention messages among their peers | 766 surveyed | 24 | L: 100 % | - | Surveyed MSM reported higher frequency of condom protected receptive anal sex at year 2 (33.8 % pre-intervention and 50.3 % post-intervention; p < 0.01). | 19 |
Health Worker Delivered | ||||||||||
Operario et al.44
| Pre/Post | MSMW | Oakland, CA | Multi, interactive + skills, 1-on-1 sessions | 68 | 3 | AA: 100 % | - | Increased condom use during receptive (44 % vs. 22 %; p = 0.04) and insertive (58 % vs. 33 %; p = 0.02) anal sex with male partners. | 18 |
Reference | Design | Target | Region | Intervention | Sample Size | Follow-up (mo.) | Race | BMO* | Results | Score |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Peer Delivered | ||||||||||
Greenberg et al.91
| RCT | High-risk (F) | Baltimore, MD; New York, NY; Seattle, WA | Multi, didactic + interactive + skills, group + optional 1-on-1 sessions | 510 | 3, 6 | AA: 59 %, L: 14 % | - | An increase in condom protected sex from 3 to 6 months was seen in the control (log OR 0.13; SE = 0.18 and 0.25; SE = 0.19 respectively), and intervention (log OR = 0.30 and 0.33, respectively) groups. | 22 |
Health Worker Delivered | ||||||||||
Carey et al.92
| RCT | High-risk (F) | Syracuse, NY | Multi, interactive + optional skills, group sessions | 102 | 1, 3 | AA: 88 %, O: 6 % | - | An increase in condom protected vaginal sex from pretest to 3 months was seen in the control (0.13; 95 % CI: -0.48, 0.75) and intervention (0.43; 95 % CI: -0.12, 0.97) groups. No difference was found between groups [t(63.4) = 1.43, p = 0.16]. | 23 |
Davey-Rothwell et al.93
| RCT | High-risk (F) | Baltimore, MD | Multi, interactive, group + 1-on-1 sessions | 169 | 6, 12, 18 | AA: 98 % | - | The intervention group showed an increase in condom use during vaginal (AOR 0.47; 95 % CI: 0.25, 0.87) and anal sex (0.24; 95 % CI: 0.09, 0.68), as well as with main (0.41; 95 % CI: 0.21, 0.77) and non-main partners (0.33; 95 % CI: 0.14, 0.79). | 18 |
Raj et al.47
| RCT | High-risk (F) | Boston, MA | 1) Multi, HIV intensive didactic + interactive, group sessions; 2) 1 + skills, less HIV intensive | 162 | 3 | L: 100 % | - | At follow up, the magnitude of the increase in condom use in Intervention 1 decreased (AOR 2.92; 95 % CI: 0.86, 9.89) while increasing slightly in Intervention 2 (AOR 5.91; 95 % CI: 1.98, 17.6). | 19 |
Van Devanter et al.94
| RCT | High-risk (F) | New York, NY; Baltimore, MD, Seattle, WA | Multi, didactic + skills, group sessions | 604 | 3 | AA: 58 %, L: 18 %, O: 8 % | - | In a logistic regression, the strongest predictor of condom use was exposure to the intervention (OR 5.5; 95 % CI: 2.8, 10.7) | 25 |
Reference | Design | Target | Region | Intervention | Sample Size | Follow-up (mo.) | Race | BMO* | Results | Score |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Digitally Delivered | ||||||||||
Flaskerud and Nyamathi95
| Pre/Po-st | Low-income (F) | Los Angeles, CA | Single, didactic, 1-on-1 session | 712 | 2-3 | AA: 51 %, L: 49 % | - | Risk data provided in aggregate. Significant differences in risky sex and drug use were found in both the experimental and control groups [F (1,708) = 8.27, P = .004]. | 22 |
Hobfoll et al.96
| RCT | Low-income (F) | Akron, Ohio | Multi, didactic + interactive, group sessions | 935 | 6 | AA:55 %, O: 3 % | + | The intervention group reported a greater reduction in unprotected sex (from 2.59 to 2.31) than the control group (from 2.64 to 2.48) during at follow up [F(1, 679) = 17.00; p < 0.001; η2 = 0.02]. No significant effect was found for incident STI rate. | 20 |
Kalichman et al.97
| RCT | Low-income (F) | Chicago, IL | Single, didactic, group session; 1) Gender/Race matched video presenter + standard public health message;2) 1 + culturally tailored content | 106 | 2 weeks | AA: 100 % | - | No significant differences in condom use by intervention condition over time was found. | 24 |
Robinson et al.98
| RCT | Low-income (F) | Minneapolis, MN | Multi, didactic + interactive, group sessions | 218 | 9 | AA: 80 %, L: 13 %, O: 4 % | - | No significant differences in condom use by intervention condition over time was found. | 26 |
Peer Delivered | ||||||||||
Dancy and Berbaum99
| Pre/Post | Low-income (F) | Chicago, IL | Multi, didactic + interactive, group sessions. | 279 | 9 | AA: 100 % | - | Site 1, which received the intervention during phase 1, showed the greatest increase in condom use [linear and quadratic trends significant; t(1, 255) = 3.28; p = 0.0011 and t(1, 255) = –2.52; p = 0.0119, respectively]. | 25 |
Dancy et al.100
| Other | Low-income (F) | Midwest | Multi, didactic + interactive, group sessions. | 280 | 3, 6,9 | AA: 100 % | - | Risk data provided in aggregate (i.e. number of partners, condom use). Protective sexual behaviors increased in the intervention group from a mean score of 1.61 to 2.05 at 9 months (p < 0.002), however scores did not change appreciably in the control group over time. | 18 |
Health Worker Delivered | ||||||||||
Cohen et al.101
| Other | Low-income (F) | N/A | Multi, didactic, group sessions | 199 | 2 | L: 91 %, AA: 8 % | - | No direct results reported for condom use. | 22 |
DiClemente and Wingood102
| RCT | Low-income (F) | San Francisco, CA | Multi, didactic + interactive + Skills, group sessions | 128 | 3 | AA: 100 % | - | Increase in consistent condom use by intervention group (OR 2.1; 95 % CI, 1.03 - 4.15; P = 0.04). | 27 |
Ehrhardt et al.49
| RCT | Vulnerable (F) (Family planning clinic) | Brooklyn, NY | 1) Multi, didactic + interactive, group sessions; 2) Abridged version of 1 | 360 | 1, 6, 12 | AA: 73 %, L: 17 %, O: 10 % | - | At 1-month, both interventions yielded improved or maintained safe sex behavior (d = 0.36, 95 % CI 0.04, 0.69 and d = 0.30, 95 % CI 0.00, 0.61, respectively). Results diminished by 12 months. | 25 |
Hobfoll et al.103
| RCT | Low-income (F) (pregnant) | Akron, OH | Multi, didactic + skills, group sessions | 206 | 6 | AA: 57 %, O: 3 % | - | Critical difference among means for the Dunn-Sidak multiple comparison procedure were significant of 2.444 between intervention and control (α = 0.05). | 18 |
Jemmott et al.104
| RCT | Vulnerable (F) (women’s health clinic) | Newark, NJ | 1) Single, didactic, 1-on-1 session; 2) 1+ interactive + skills; 3) Single, didactic + interactive, group session; 4) 3 + skills | 564 | 3, 6, 12 | AA: 100 % | + | At 12 months, Intervention 4 reported less unprotected sex than the other intervention groups [Cohen’s d = 0.23; p = 0.02], and was less likely to report an incident STI than controls (d = 0.20; p = 0.03). | 26 |
Kelly et al.105
| RCT | Vulnerable (F) (primary health care clinic) | Milwaukee, WI | Multi, didactic + interactive + skills, group sessions | 197 | 3 | AA: 87 %, O: 4 %, L: 3 % | - | Condom use increased from 26 % to 56 % in the intervention group, while no change was seen in the control group (p <0.001). | 17 |
Lindenberg et al.106
| RCT | Low-income (F) | Georgia | Multi, didactic, group sessions | 56 | 3 | L: 100 % | - | Condom use at last sex increased among single (71.4 % to 92.9 %) and partnered (11.1 % to 19.4 %) women (no other relevant statistics provided). | 23 |
Peragallo et al.107
| RCT | Low-income (F) | Chicago, IL | Multi, didactic + interactive + skills, group sessions | 454 | 6 | L: 100 % | - | A greater proportion of the intervention group reported always using condoms (23 %) compared to the control group (17 %) at 6 months, however the difference was not significant (p = 0.141). The effect size calculated using Hedge’s g method was 0.17. | 21 |
St. Lawrence et al.108
| RCT | Low-income (F) | Atlanta, GA | 1) Multi, didactic, group sessions; 2) 1 + skills observation; 3) 2 + skills practice | 445 | 3, 6 12 | AA: 100 % | - | No effect size analyses provided (F = 5.81; p <0.005). The percentage of condom-protected intercourse occasions increased from 44 % to 54 % at the 6-month follow-up, then declined to 49 % after 1 year. | 25 |
Reference | Design | Target | Region | Intervention | Sample Size | Follow-up (mo.) | Race | BMO* | Results | Score |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Digitally Delivered | ||||||||||
Alemagno et al.109
| RCT | Incarcerated | Ohio | Single, didactic, one-on-one session | 212 | 2 | AA: 69 % | - | Intervention group with increased report of sex without condom compared with baseline (62.3 % pre-intervention and 81.5 % post-intervention; p < 0.05). | 23 |
Peer Delivered | ||||||||||
Cohen et al.23
| Pre/Post | Community (everyone) | New Orleans, LA | State-wide condom social marketing intervention | 1507 survey-ed | 24 | AA: 42 %, | - | Increase in condom use at last sex for AA women with ≥2 sex partners at one (39 %; p = 0.1) and two years (48 %; p < 0.001) compared with baseline (30 %). | 15 |
Nyamathi et al.110
| RCT | High-risk (F) + intimate partner | Los Angeles, CA | 1) Multi, didactic + interactive + skills, group sessions; 2) Health worker delivered; Multi, didactic + interactive + skills, group sessions. | 633 | 6 | AA: 65 % L: 26 % | - | The portion of subjects engaging in unprotected sex decreased in all groups (Control from 62 % to 53 %, Intervention 1 from 64 % to 56 %, and Intervention 2 from 79 % to 59 %; χ2 = 26.27; p < 0.0001). There was no significant difference in the decrease of unprotected sex between the control group and either Intervention 1 (B = 0.04; P = 0.70) or Intervention 2 (B = -0.10; p = 0.88) | 20 |
Health Worker Delivered | ||||||||||
El-Bassel et al.111
| RCT | Serodiscordant couples | New York, NY; Atlanta, GA; Los Angeles, CA; Philadelphia, PA | Multi, interactive, 1-on-1 + group sessions | 535 couples | 6, 12 | AA: 100 % | + | Intervention group with increased proportion of consistent condom use (RR 1.45; p < 0.001) over 12 months. No difference in cumulative STI incidence between groups (RR 0.98). | 25 |
Linn et al.112
| RCT | Homeless shelter (M) | Nashville, TN | Multi, interactive + skills, group sessions | 257 | 1.5, 3, 4.5, 6 | AA: 59 %, L: 6 % | - | The mean risk score (based on unprotected sex) was significantly lower in the intervention (1.1) than in the control group (3.2; t = 2.64; p = 0.01). | 26 |
Nyamathi et al.113
| RCT | Homeless shelter/Drug recovery program (F) | Los Angeles, CA | Multi, didactic, group sessions for 1) women only; 2) women + a supportive person; 3) 1 + interactive + skills; 4) 2 + interactive + skills | 241 | 6, 12 | AA: 91 % | - | All groups with decrease in unprotected sex at 12 months (χ2 = 55.47; p < 0.001). No significant difference in condom use by intervention condition overtime was found. | 18 |
Nyamathi and Stein46
| RCT | Homeless shelter/Drug recovery program (F) | Los Angeles, CA | Single, didactic + interactive + skills, group session | 345 | 24 | AA: 100 % | - | Risk data provided in aggregate (condom use and number of partners). HIV risk behavior decreased in both cohorts (Z-score -5.34 in the intervention cohort and -7.49 in the control cohort; p < 0.001). Comparison of the two cohorts at year 2 revealed no significant difference (Z-score -1.41). | 21 |
Otto-Salaj et al.114
| RCT | Patients with psychiatric diagnosis | Milwaukee, WI | Multi, didactic, group sessions | 189 | 3, 6, 9, 12 | AA: 51 %, L: 6 % | - | Women in the intervention group had a greater increase in condom use than those in the control group at 9 months (mean occurrence from 0.38 to 2.83; t = 2.10, p < 0.04). There was a significant interaction effect between intervention condition and gender over time (χ2 = 21.73, p < 0.001), and men in both conditions exhibited no significant increase in condom use. | 19 |
El-Bassel et al.115
| RCT | Couples | Bronx, NY | Multi, interactive, dyadic sessions | 81 couples; 136 women | 12 | AA: 54 %, L: 38 % | - | Women who received intervention, with or without partner not significantly more likely to report 100 % condom use (adjusted OR 1.72; p = 0.14). | 24 |
Harvey et al.116
| RCT | Couples | Los Angeles, CA | Multi, Interactive + skills, dyadic sessions | 146 | 3,6 | L: 100 % | - | Increased condom use at 3 months compared with baseline in both intervention (43.6 % vs. 23.6 %) and control (44.2 % vs. 36.5 %) (p ≤ 0.01); no significant difference between groups. | 20 |