You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
© 2013. This work is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.
Abstract
Introduction
HIV stigma inflicts hardship and suffering on people living with HIV (PLHIV) and interferes with both prevention and treatment efforts. Health professionals are often named by PLHIV as an important source of stigma. This study was designed to examine rates and drivers of stigma and discrimination among doctors, nurses and ward staff in different urban healthcare settings in high HIV prevalence states in India.
Methods
This cross-sectional study enrolled 305 doctors, 369 nurses and 346 ward staff in both governmental and non-governmental healthcare settings in Mumbai and Bengaluru, India. The approximately one-hour long interviews focused on knowledge related to HIV transmission, personal and professional experiences with PLHIV, instrumental and symbolic stigma, endorsement of coercive policies, and intent to discriminate in professional and personal situations that involve high and low risk of fluid exposure.
Results
High levels of stigma were reported by all groups. This included a willingness to prohibit female PLHIV from having children (55 to 80%), endorsement of mandatory testing for female sex workers (94 to 97%) and surgery patients (90 to 99%), and stating that people who acquired HIV through sex or drugs “got what they deserved” (50 to 83%). In addition, 89% of doctors, 88% of nurses and 73% of ward staff stated that they would discriminate against PLHIV in professional situations that involved high likelihood of fluid exposure, and 57% doctors, 40% nurses and 71% ward staff stated that they would do so in low-risk situations as well. Significant and modifiable drivers of stigma and discrimination included having less frequent contact with PLHIV, and a greater number of transmission misconceptions, blame, instrumental and symbolic stigma. Participants in all three groups reported high rates of endorsement of coercive measures and intent to discriminate against PLHIV. Stigma and discrimination were associated with multiple modifiable drivers, which are consistent with previous research, and which need to be targeted in future interventions.
Conclusions
Stigma reduction intervention programmes targeting healthcare providers in urban India need to address fear of transmission, improve universal precaution skills, and involve PLHIV at all stages of the intervention to reduce symbolic stigma and ensure that relevant patient interaction skills are taught.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details
1 Center for AIDS Prevention Studies, University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA; St. John's Research Institute, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India; School of Public Health, University of California, Berkeley, CA, USA
2 Department of Health Education, National Institute of Mental Health and Neurosciences, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India
3 Centre for Health and Social Sciences, School of Health Systems Studies, Tata Institute of Social Sciences, Mumbai, Maharastra, India
4 Center for AIDS Prevention Studies, University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA