Table 1.
Sample characteristics of newly diagnosed WLHIV in rural Uganda by IPV and VL status (n= 150)
| Total n = 150 |
IPV History and Unsuppressed VLs n = 37 |
IPV History and Suppressed VLs n = 32 |
No IPV History and Unsuppressed VLs n = 42 |
No IPV History and Suppressed VLs n = 39 |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||||
| M(SD) | M(SD) | M(SD) | M(SD) | M(SD) | |
| Years of schooling | 6.9 (3.4) | 7.1 (3.3) | 7.0 (3.4) | 6.7 (3.7) | 6.9 (3.3) |
| Age (in years) | 28.3 (9.2) | 25.3 (4.7) | 28.8 (10.9) | 28.0 (9.7) | 31.2 (9.7)* |
| N (%) | N (%) | N (%) | N (%) | N (%) | |
|
|
|||||
| Recent IPV | 29 (19.3%) | 15 (40.5%) | 14 (43.8%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) |
| Marital status | |||||
| Never married | 16 (10.7) | 4 (10.8) | 4 (12.5) | 5 (11.9) | 3 (7.7) |
| Divorced/widowed | 44 (29.3) | 10 (27.0) | 9 (28.1) | 14 (33.3) | 11 (28.2) |
| Married and separated | 18 (12.0) | 3 (8.1) | 6 (18.8) | 3 (7.1) | 6 (15.4) |
| Married and living together | 72 (48.0) | 20 (54.1) | 13 (40.6) | 20 (47.6) | 19 (48.7) |
| Wealth Index | |||||
| Lowest wealth quintile | 38 (25.3) | 7 (18.9) | 6 (18.8) | 11 (26.2) | 14 (35.9) |
| 2nd lowest wealth quintile | 31 (20.7) | 10 (27.0) | 8 (25.0) | 9 (21.4) | 4 (10.3) |
| 3rd lowest wealth quintile | 14 (9.3) | 5 (13.5) | 3 (9.4) | 2 (4.8) | 4 (10.3) |
| 2nd highest wealth quintile | 36 (24.0) | 8 (21.6) | 10 (31.3) | 9 (21.4) | 9 (23.1) |
| Highest wealth quintile | 31 (20.7) | 7 (18.9) | 5 (15.6) | 11 (26.2) | 8 (20.5) |
For continuous variables, estimates represent means and p-values for one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA); all other tests are based on Chi square analyses.
IPV, intimate partner violence; VL, viral load.
*
p < .05