Safety and acceptability of couples HIV testing and counseling for US men who have sex with men: a randomized prevention study

Abstract

We tested a couples HIV testing and counseling (CHTC) intervention with male couples in Atlanta by randomizing eligible couples to receive either CHTC or separate individual voluntary HIV counseling and testing (iVCT). To evaluate the acceptability and safety of CHTC, main outcomes were satisfaction with the intervention and the proportions of couples reporting intimate partner violence (IPV) and relationship dissolution after the service. The results indicated that the service was very acceptable to men (median 7-item index of satisfaction was 34 for CHTC and 35 for iVCT, P = .4). There was no difference in either incident IPV (22% versus 17% for CHTC and iVCT, respectively, P = .6) or relationship dissolution (42% versus 51% for CHTC and iVCT, respectively, P = .5). Based on the preliminary data, CHTC is safe for male couples, and it is equally acceptable to iVCT for men who have main partners.

Keywords: HIV; male couples; men who have sex with men; testing services.

Figure 1

Recruitment, randomization, and inclusion of men who have sex with men (MSM) in a study of couples-based versus individual HIV testing and counseling, Atlanta, 2010 to 2011. *Sample sizes reported at the couple level. ^†These sample sizes include couples later determined to be ineligible because of a previous HIV diagnosis or inauthentic couple status—8 from the nonrandomized group, 4 from the CHTC arm, and 6 from the individual voluntary HIV counseling and testing (iVCT) arm. See text for details. ^§This analysis sample corresponds to the outcome of intimate partner violence (IPV). Samples for other outcomes varied depending on the number of missing responses on variables of interest and the subsample of analysis (ie, serodiscordant couples). These sample sizes are noted in the tables.