<?xml version="1.0"?>
<oai_dc:dc xmlns:oai_dc="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc.xsd">
  <dc:title>No effect of test and treat on sexual behaviours at population level in rural South Africa</dc:title>
  <dc:creator>Rolland, M.</dc:creator>
  <dc:creator>McGrath, N.</dc:creator>
  <dc:creator>Tiendrebeogo, T.</dc:creator>
  <dc:creator>/Larmarange, Joseph</dc:creator>
  <dc:creator>Pillay, D.</dc:creator>
  <dc:creator>Dabis, F.</dc:creator>
  <dc:creator>Orne-Gliemann, J.</dc:creator>
  <dc:creator>ANRS TasP Study Group</dc:creator>
  <dc:subject>Africa</dc:subject>
  <dc:subject>antiretroviral therapy</dc:subject>
  <dc:subject>HIV</dc:subject>
  <dc:subject>prevention</dc:subject>
  <dc:subject>sexual behaviour</dc:subject>
  <dc:description>Context: Within the community-randomized ANRS 12249 Treatment-as-Prevention trial conducted in rural South Africa, we analysed sexual behaviours stratified by sex over time, comparing immediate antiretroviral therapy irrespective of CD4(+) cell count vs. CD4(+)-guided antiretroviral therapy (start at CD4(+) cell count &gt;350 cells/mu l then &gt;500 cells/mu l) arms. Methods: As part of the 6-monthly home-based trial rounds, a sexual behaviour individual questionnaire was administered to all residents at least 16 years. We considered seven indicators: sexual intercourse in the past month; at least one regular sexual partner in the past 6 months; at least one casual sexual partner in the past 6 months and more than one sexual partner in the past 6 months; condom use at last sex (CLS) with regular partner, CLS with casual partner, and point prevalence estimate of concurrency. We conducted repeated cross-sectional analyses, stratified by sex. Generalized Estimating Equations models were used, including trial arm, trial time, calendar time and interaction between trial arm and trial time. Results: CLS with regular partner varied between 29-51% and 23-46% for men and women, respectively, with significantly lower odds among women in the control vs. intervention arm by trial end (P&lt;0.001). CLS with casual partner among men showed a significant interaction between arm and trial round, with no consistent pattern. Women declared more than one partner in the past 6 months in less than 1% of individual questionnaires; among men, rates varied between 5-12%, and odds significantly and continuously declined between calendar rounds 1 and 7 [odds ratio = 4.2 (3.24-5.45)]. Conclusion: Universal Test and Treat was not associated with increased sexual risk behaviours.</dc:description>
  <dc:date>2019</dc:date>
  <dc:type>text</dc:type>
  <dc:identifier>https://www.documentation.ird.fr/hor/fdi:010087821</dc:identifier>
  <dc:identifier>fdi:010087821</dc:identifier>
  <dc:identifier>Rolland M., McGrath N., Tiendrebeogo T., Larmarange Joseph, Pillay D., Dabis F., Orne-Gliemann J., ANRS TasP Study Group. No effect of test and treat on sexual behaviours at population level in rural South Africa. 2019, 33 (4),  709-722</dc:identifier>
  <dc:language>EN</dc:language>
  <dc:coverage>AFRIQUE DU SUD</dc:coverage>
</oai_dc:dc>
