Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2020 Sep 11.
Published in final edited form as: Am J Reprod Immunol. 2020 Jun 9;84(2):e13263. doi: 10.1111/aji.13263

Table 3.

Differences in sexual risk behaviours between women who reported receptive anal intercourse (RAI) and did not (non-RAI) in the past-year, combined NHBS-HET study cycles 2010 and, 2013.

Sexual risk behaviours RAI women
N=2924
Non-RAI women
N=6228
Mean difference1
(95% CI)
p-value
Behaviours in past 12
months
Mean (N) 95%CI Mean (N) 95%CI
Number of partners
 All partners 10.2 7.7-12.7 3.5 3.0-3.9 6.7 (4.7-8.7) <0.0001
 Main partners 1.4 1.3-1.5 1.1 1.1-1.1 0.3 (0.1-0.4) <0.0001
 Casual partners 8.6 7.2-10.0 2.3 2.1-2.6 6.3 (4.8-7.7) <0.0001
Last-sex partner
characteristics
N % N % OR
(95%CI)
mhOR2
(95% CI)
Partner type
 Main partner 1805 61.8 4704 75.6 ref ref
 Casual partner 1115 38.2 1520 24.4 1.91 (1.74-2.10) 1.84 (1.67-2.02)
Partner HIV status
 Negative 941 32.2 2792 44.9 ref ref
 Unknown/positive 1979 67.8 3431 55.1 1.71 (1.56-1.88) 1.68 (1.53-1.85)
Condom use during last
sexual episode
N % N % OR
(95%CI)
mhOR2
(95% CI)
Condom use – at last RVI
All partners
 UVI 2605 90.8 5054 81.2 ref ref
 Condom protected RVI 264 9.2 1170 18.8 0.44 (0.38-0.50) 0.46 (0.40-0.53)
Main partners
 UVI 1657 93.1 3984 84.7 ref ref
 Condom protected RVI 123 6.9 720 15.3 0.41 (0.34-0.50) 0.43 (0.35-0.53)
Casual partners
 UVI 948 87.1 1070 70.4 ref ref
 Condom protected RVI 141 12.9 450 29.6 0.35 (0.29-0.44) 0.38 (0.31-0.47)
Condom use - by RAI women (all partners) - -
 UVI 2605 90.8 - -
 Condom protected RVI 264 9.2 ref ref
 UAI 970 92.8 - -
 Condom protected AI 75 7.2 0.76 (0.58-1.00) 0.80 (0.61-1.05)

Note. RAI, receptive anal intercourse; UVI, unprotected vaginal intercourse; UAI, unprotected anal intercourse; RVI, receptive vaginal intercourse

1

T-tests stratified for age, exchange sex, race/ethnicity produced similar results, not shown (with some exceptions where there was weaker evidence for a difference in main partners among Hispanic and Other racial/ethnic women and for main and casual partners among White women, p>0.05). Evidence for a difference in main partners was only observed in San Diego (p=0.02); there was evidence for a difference in casual partners in all but 4 cities (Baltimore, Denver, San Juan, Seattle).

2

Mantel-Haenszel OR stratified for city (adjustments for age, exchange sex, race/ethnicity produced similar results, not shown)