Table 1.
Comparisons HIV-positive IDUs by their injection partners’ HIV sero-status
| All (n = 759)a | Group P (n = 244)a | Group N (n = 60)a | Group U (n = 369)a | Group M (n = 86)a | Test statistics for overall testb | Pair-wise comparisonc | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age | M = 42.0 (SD = 6.7) | M = 42.5 (SD = 6.6) | M = 42.1 (SD = 6.8) | M = 41.9 (SD = 6.6) | M = 41.4 (SD = 7.2) | F = 0.66, p > 0.1 | NS |
| Biological sex | |||||||
| Male | 494 (65.1%) | 149 (61.1%) | 38 (63.3%) | 249 (67.5%) | 58 (67.4%) | Χ2 = 2.96, df = 3, p > 0.1 | NS |
| Sexual orientation based on behavior | |||||||
| Heterosexual | 515 (71.8%) | 169 (72.2%) | 39 (75.0%) | 252 (71.6%) | 55 (69.6%) | Χ2 = 0.48, df = 3, p > 0.1 | NS |
| Race | |||||||
| White | 81 (11.0%) | 26 (11.1%) | 9 (15.3%) | 41 (11.4%) | 5 (6.0%) | Χ2 = 9.44, df = 9, p > 0.1 | NS |
| Black | 477 (64.5%) | 140 (59.6%) | 36 (61.0%) | 244 (67.6%) | 57 (67.9%) | ||
| Hispanic | 123 (16.6%) | 49 (20.9%) | 9 (15.3%) | 51 (14.1%) | 14 (16.7%) | ||
| Other | 58 (7.8%) | 20 (8.5%) | 5 (8.5%) | 25 (6.9%) | 8 (9.5%) | ||
| Education | |||||||
| <High school | 317 (41.9%) | 102 (42.0%) | 23 (38.3%) | 156 (42.4%) | 36 (41.9%) | Χ2 = 0.35, df = 3, p > 0.1 | NS |
| Income <$5,000 per year | 391 (52.9%) | 125 (52.5%) | 30 (51.7%) | 190 (52.8%) | 46 (55.4%) | Χ2 = 0.26, df = 3, p > 0.1 | NS |
| Currently housed | 599 (79.5%) | 203 (83.9%) | 48 (80.0%) | 282 (77.3%) | 66 (76.7%) | Χ2 = 4.39, df = 3, p > 0.1 | NS |
| CD4 < 200 | 214 (29.2%) | 72 (30.5%) | 17 (28.8%) | 94 (26.6%) | 31 (36.9%) | Χ2 = 3.74, df = 3, p > 0.1 | NS |
| Detectable viral load | 599 (82.4%) | 200 (85.5%) | 44 (78.6%) | 286 (81.0%) | 69 (82.1%) | Χ2 = 2.55, df = 3, p > 0.1 | NS |
| Injection risk | |||||||
| Number of injection partners | M = 5.25 | M = 2.53 | M = 2.80 | M = 7.03 | M = 7.03 | H = 158.18, p < 0.00 | PN vs. UM |
| Median = 3 (SD = 9.69) | Median = 2 (SD = 5.97) | Median = 1 (SD = 3.79) | Median = 3 (SD = 11.0) | Median = 3 (SD = 12.6) | |||
| Lent used needle or shared paraphernalia | 509 (67.7%) | 148 (61.4%) | 35 (58.3%) | 259 (71.0%) | 67 (77.9%) | Χ2 = 12.63, df = 3, p < 0.01 | P vs. UM N vs. M |
| Drug use | |||||||
| Number times injected | M = 86.45 | M = 66.54 | M = 79.35 | M = 92.79 | M = 120.67 | H = 8.57, p < 0.05 | P vs. UM |
| Median = 16.0 (SD = 131.7) | Median = 10.5 (SD = 105.6) | Median = 13 (SD = 135.4) | Median = 24 (SD = 133.6) | Median = 42 (SD = 173.7) | |||
| Number of different drugs used | M = 3.88 (SD = 2.22) | M = 3.75 (SD = 1.99) | M = 3.20 (SD = 1.92) | M = 3.96 (SD = 2.38) | M = 4.41 (SD = 2.18) | H = 11.30, p < 0.05 | PN vs. M |
| N vs. U | |||||||
| U vs. M | |||||||
| Injected cocaine or crack | 242 (32.4%) | 77 (32.1%) | 8 (13.8%) | 131 (35.9%) | 26 (31.3%) | Χ2 = 11.25, df = 3, p < 0.05 | N vs. UM |
| Injected heroin | 453 (60.7%) | 146 (60.8%) | 34 (58.6%) | 219 (60.3%) | 54 (63.5%) | Χ2 = 0.41, df = 3, p > 0.1 | |
| Injected “speedball” (heroin and cocaine together) | 386 (51.8%) | 104 (43.3%) | 27 (46.6%) | 200 (55.1%) | 55 (65.5%) | Χ2 = 15.40, df = 3, p < 0.01 | P vs. UM |
| N vs. M | |||||||
| Psychosocial factors | |||||||
| Partner norm supporting safer drug use | M = 1.12 (SD = 3.33) | M = 1.22 (SD = 3.16) | M = 1.51 (SD = 3.05) | M = 1.13 (SD = 3.45) | M = 0.53 (SD = 3.44) | H = 3.65, p > 0.1 | NS |
| Psychological distress | M = 2.00 (SD = 0.80) | M = 1.98 (SD = 0.77) | M = 1.98 (SD = 0.82) | M = 2.00 (SD = 0.79) | M = 2.07 (SD = 0.91) | H = 0.21, p > 0.1 | NS |
| Empowerment | M = 2.84 (SD = 0.28) | M = 2.85 (SD = 0.26) | M = 2.88 (SD = 0.34) | M = 2.83 (SD = 0.27) | M = 2.81 (SD = 0.31) | H = 2.68, p > 0.1 | NS |
| Responsibility | M = 4.23 (SD = 0.69) | M = 4.22 (SD = 0.69) | M = 4.43 (SD = 0.50) | M = 4.20 (SD = 0.71) | M = 4.22 (SD = 0.68) | H = 4.91, p > 0.1 | NS |
Data from INSPIRE Study conducted in four US cities (Baltimore, Miami, New York, and San Francisco) from 2001 to 2005
Group P had HIV-positive injection partners only. Group N had HIV-negative injection partners only. Group U had any injection partners of unknown HIV status. Group M had HIV-positive and HIV-negative injection partners. PN vs. UM groups P and N are significantly different from groups U and M, but there is no significant difference between groups P and N and between groups U and M. P vs. UM group P is significantly different from groups U and M, and there is no significant difference between groups U and M. N vs. M groups N and M are significantly different. PN vs. M groups P and N are significantly different from group M, and there is significant difference between groups P and N. N vs. U groups N and U are significantly different. U vs. M groups U and M are significantly different. N vs. UM group N is significantly different from groups U and M, and there is no significant difference between groups U and M. NS there is no significant difference is observed among the four groups
aTotal does not always equal 759, 244, 60, 369, or 86 due to missing data
bFor categorical variables, chi-square test statistics are reported. For normally distributed continuous variables, F statistics are reported and for non-normally distributed continuous variables, Kruskal–Wallis H statistics (denoted as H; chi-square with 3° of freedom is used to approximate the significance level) are reported
cSignificance level <0.05 for pair-wise tests