Search

HIV prevalence and incidence in South Africa remain high, making HIV a part of everyday life. Community narratives on HIV treatment and prevention are important and influence official and unofficial health messaging and community perceptions and understandings of HIV. We explore how contributors and the columnist of an agony aunt column position HIV relative to choices made about love, partnership, and sex over three years. We analysed all columns of an agony aunt series (Antie Mona) published between December 2012 and November 2015. The column is published in a South African, Afrikaans-language newspaper “Son”, prioritising sensationalist news items. Trends were identified through narrative analysis. Data were managed in ATLAS.ti and inductive, iterative coding conducted. It was found that letters to the agony aunt rarely refer to HIV directly (less than 7%). Euphemisms such as diseases of the flesh and the great flu were more commonly used instead of HIV or AIDS. Letters addressed HIV in three ways: direct references to experiences living with HIV; direct questions about HIV prevention; and scenarios where HIV could (from a public health perspective) have been the main concern, but everyday issues took precedence. The majority of letters fell into this latter category where the writers focused on the immediate concerns of good sexual relations, problems related to love and romantic relationships, good moral behaviour of others, and issues of oppressive life conditions rather than on HIV directly. The findings illustrate that informal, public contributions to health information, such as agony aunts, are important narratives that inform popular perspectives on HIV and health. A better appreciation of this context would allow health implementers to ensure that these role players receive updated health messaging to avoid the risk of HIV-related stigma where HIV is used as a moral rod to punish perceived moral transgressions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper explores contextual heterogeneity within a community randomised trial HPTN 071 (Population Effects of Antiretroviral Treatment to Reduce HIV Transmission) carried out in 21 study communities (12 Zambian, 9 South African). The trial evaluates the impact of a combination HIV prevention package (including household-based HIV counselling and testing and anti-retroviral treatment (ART) eligibility regardless of CD4-count) on HIV incidence. The selection, matching and randomisation of study communities relied on key epidemiological and demographic variables and community and stakeholder support. In 2013, following the selection of study communities, a “Broad Brush Survey” (BBS) approach was used to rapidly gather qualitative data on each study community, prior to the implementation of the trial intervention. First-year process indicator intervention data (2014–2015) were collected during the household-based intervention by community lay workers. Using an open/closed typology of urban communities (indicating more or less heterogeneity), this qualitative inquiry presents key features of 12 Zambian communities using a list of four meta-indicators (physical features, social organisation, networks and community narratives). These indicators are then compared with four intervention process indicators in a smaller set of four study communities. The process indicators selected for this analysis indicate response to the intervention (uptake) amongst adults. The BBS qualitative data are used to interpret patterns of similarity and variability in the process indicators across four communities. We found that meta-indicators of local context helped to interpret patterns of similarity and variability emerging across and within the four communities. Features especially significant for influencing heterogeneity in process indicators include proportion of middle-class residents, proximity to neighbouring communities and town centre, the scale of the informal economy, livelihood-linked mobility, presence of HIV stakeholders over time and commitment to community action. Future interdisciplinary analysis is needed to explore if these patterns of difference continue to hold up over the full intervention period and all intervention communities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]