Table 3.

Comparison and odds of concordance about type of sexual agreement based on HIV-negative gay male couples’ use of substances with sex

	Concurred about type of sexual agreement
Sample size: 162 dyads	Couple reported yes N = 137 dyads		Couple did not concur (ref) N = 25 dyads
Substance use with sex	One or both partners used		One or both partners used
Within relationship	N	%	N	%	AOR	CI
Party drugsa	17	12	2	8	1.59	0.34 – 7.47
Marijuana	53	39	4	16	3.21*	1.04 – 9.89
Alcohol	118	86	20	80	1.54	0.52 – 4.54
EDMb	25	18	7	28	0.55	0.21 – 1.47
Amyl nitrates	25	18	3	12	1.60	0.44 – 5.82
Sample size: 67 dyads, 112 gay men	N = 95 gay men		N = 17 gay men
Outside of relationshipc	N	%	N	%	AOR	CI
Party drugsa	13	14	1	6	2.51	0.27 – 23.52
Marijuana	33	35	3	18	2.52	0.45 – 14.21
Alcohol	68	72	7	41	3.59	0.90 – 14.39
EDMb	29	31	5	29	1.03	0.23 – 4.60
Amyl nitrates	39	41	3	18	3.24	0.58 – 17.97

Notes.

Findings in this table were produced from couple-level analyses. Logistic regression models for within the relationship controlled for engagement of unprotected anal intercourse with the main partner whereas the logistic regression models for outside the relationship controlled for unprotected anal intercourse with a casual MSM partner.

AOR adjusted odds ratio, CI confidence interval

^*p<.05

^aParty drugs include ecstasy, ketamine, GHB, cocaine, and methamphetamine.

^bEDM denotes Erectile Dysfunction Medication.

^cRates, percentages and adjusted odds ratios only included those who reported they had sex with a casual MSM partner within the prior three months to assessment.