Effectiveness of healthy relationships video-group-A videoconferencing group intervention for women living with HIV: preliminary findings from a randomized controlled trial

Abstract

Introduction: Expanded access to efficacious interventions is needed for women living with human immunodeficiency virus (WLH) in the United States. Availability of "prevention with (human immunodeficiency virus [HIV)] positives" interventions in rural/remote and low HIV prevalence areas remains limited, leaving WLH in these communities few options for receiving effective behavioral interventions such as Healthy Relationships (HR). Offering such programs via videoconferencing groups (VGs) may expand access. This analysis tests the effectiveness of HR-VG (versus wait-list control) for reducing sexual risk behavior among WLH and explores intervention satisfaction.

Subjects and methods: In this randomized controlled trial unprotected vaginal/anal sex occasions over the prior 3 months reported at the 6-month follow-up were compared across randomization groups through zero-inflated Poisson regression modeling, controlling for unprotected sex at baseline. Seventy-one WLH were randomized and completed the baseline assessment (n=36 intervention and n=35 control); 59 (83% in each group) had follow-up data.

Results: Among those who engaged in unprotected sex at 6-month follow-up, intervention participants had approximately seven fewer unprotected occasions than control participants (95% confidence interval 5.43-7.43). Intervention participants reported high levels of satisfaction with HR-VG; 84% reported being "very satisfied" overall.

Conclusions: This study found promising evidence for effective dissemination of HIV risk reduction interventions via VGs. Important next steps will be to determine whether VGs are effective with other subpopulations of people living with HIV (i.e., men and non-English speakers) and to assess cost-effectiveness. Possibilities for using VGs to expand access to other psychosocial and behavioral interventions and reduce stigma are discussed.

Fig. 1.

Recruitment, randomization, and retention.

Fig. 2.

Box plot showing the difference in unprotected sex occasions between the two groups at 6-month follow-up: difference, 6.89 (95% confidence interval 5.43–8.73; p<0.001). Data represent participants reporting at least one unprotected sex occasion (n=13 and 11 in the intervention and control groups, respectively) with a median of 5 and 17 unprotected sex occasions for the intervention and control groups, respectively.