Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Are Peer Interventions for HIV Efficacious? A Systematic Review

  • Substantive Review
  • Published:
AIDS and Behavior Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Behavioral interventions to prevent HIV or assist HIV-positive persons often incorporate peers, yet empirical support for their efficacy is only recently accumulating. We describe the results of a review of the global literature, identifying 117 studies evaluating the efficacy of peer-based interventions in the area of HIV/AIDS. About half were conducted in the developing world and half in Western nations. Across a range of populations and intervention modalities, the majority of studies provided some support for peer interventions according to outcome indicators in the domains of sexual risk behavior, attitudes and cognitions, HIV knowledge, and substance use. However, outcomes assessed using biomarkers and other non-self-report variables were less likely to indicate intervention efficacy. Overall, findings suggest that we can have some confidence in peer interventions, yet more data are needed demonstrating an effect in the most rigorous study designs and with outcomes that are not potentially affected by respondent bias.

Resumen

Las intervenciones que pretenden cambiar el comportamiento para prevenir el VIH o para aydar a las personas infectadas por el VIH frecuentemente incluyen a los trabajadores no profesionales como promotores de salud, o “pares”. Sin embargo, los datos sobre la eficacia de las intervenciones que utilizan pares apenas están acumulando recientemente. Esta revisión sistemática describe los resultados de una revista de la literatura global, la cual identificó 117 estudios que evalúan la eficacia de las intervenciones basadas en pares relacionadas con el VIH. Aproximadamente la mitad de los estudios fueran llevados a cabo en los países en desarrollo y la mitad en los países desarrollados. Representando diversas poblaciones y tipos de intervenciones, la mayor parte de los estudios demuestra apoyo para el uso de pares, según resultados relacionados con comportamiento sexual riesgoso, las actitudes y la cognición, los conocimientos relacionados con el VIH, y el uso de sustancias. Sin embargo, los resultados medidos por datos biológicos y otros datos objetivos mostraron menos tendencia a indicar una intervención eficaz. En general, los resultados parcialmente apoyan el uso de las intervenciones basadas en pares pero todavía se precisan mas datos demostrando efectos en estudios de diseño riguroso y con resultados que no son limitados por un sesgo potencial de respuesta.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. World Health Organization. AIDS epidemic update: Nov 2009. Geneva: WHO; 2009.

  2. Hall H, Song R, Rhodes P, et al. Estimation of HIV incidence in the United States. JAMA. 2008;300(5):520–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Walensky R. Cost-effectiveness of HIV interventions: from cohort studies and clinical trials to policy. Top HIV Med. 2009;17(4):130–4.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Blower S, Gershengorn H, Grant R. A tale of two futures: HIV and antiretroviral therapy in San Francisco. Science. 2000;287(5453):650–4.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. United Nations General Assembly. Towards universal access: assessment by the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS on scaling up HIV prevention, treatment, care and support. New York: United Nations; 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  6. U.S. President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR). Report on work force capacity and HIV/AIDS. Washington: Office of the US Global AIDS Coordinator, U.S. Department of State; 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  7. World Health Organization. Scaling up HIV/AIDS care: service delivery and human resources perspectives. Geneva: WHO; 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  8. World Health Organization. Task shifting: rational redistribution of tasks among health workforce teams: global recommendations and guidelines. Geneva: WHO; 2008.

    Google Scholar 

  9. World Health Organization. International conference on task shifting. Addis Ababa Declaration, 10 Jan 2008. Addis Ababa: WHO; 2008.

  10. Celletti F, Wright A, Palen J, et al. Can the deployment of community health workers for the delivery of HIV services represent an effective and sustainable response to health workforce shortages? Results of a multicountry study. AIDS (Lond, Engl). 2010;24(Suppl 1):S45–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Wouters E. Mobilising the community in the fight against HIV/AIDS. Lancet. 2009;374(9700):1501.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Health Resources and Services Administration. Service delivery and HIV-positive peers. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Health Resources and Services Administration, HIV/AIDS Bureau; 2005. http://hab.hrsa.gov/publications/june5/. Accessed on 26 Jun 2009.

  13. Simoni JM, Franks J, Lehavot K, Yard SS. Peer interventions to promote health: conceptual considerations. J Orthopsychiatry (in press).

  14. UNAIDS. Peer education and HIV/AIDS: concepts, uses, and challenges. Geneva: UNAIDS; 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  15. U.S. President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR). Prevention of sexual transmission for people engaged in high risk activity. Washington; 2009.

  16. Medley A, Kennedy C, O’Reilly K, Sweat M. Effectiveness of peer education interventions for HIV prevention in developing countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis. AIDS Educ Prev. 2009;21(3):181–206.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Maticka-Tyndale E, Barnett JP. Peer-led interventions to reduce HIV risk of youth: a review. Evaluation and Program Planning. 2010;33(2):98–112.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Rhodes SD, Foley KL, Zometa CS, Bloom FR. Lay health advisor interventions among Hispanics/Latinos: A Qualitative Systematic Review. Am J Prev Med. 2007;33(5):418–27.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Webel AR, Okonsky J, Trompeta J, Holzemer WL. A systematic review of the effectiveness of peer-based interventions on health-related behaviors in adults. Am J Public Health. 2010;100(2):247–53.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Deeks JJ, Higgins JP, Altman DG. Chapter 9: analysing data and undertaking meta-analyses. In: Higgins JP, Green S, editors. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions: Cochrane Book Series. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd; 2008.

  21. Kelly JA. Popular opinion leaders and HIV prevention peer education: resolving discrepant findings, and implications for the development of effective community programmes. AIDS Care. 2004;16(2):139–50.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Cornish F, Campbell C. The social conditions for successful peer education: a comparison of two HIV prevention programs run by sex workers in India and South Africa. Am J Community Psychol. 2009;44(1–2):123–35.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank David Huh and Joyce Yang for their help with study selection and coding.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kimberly M. Nelson.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOC 545 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Simoni, J.M., Nelson, K.M., Franks, J.C. et al. Are Peer Interventions for HIV Efficacious? A Systematic Review. AIDS Behav 15, 1589–1595 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10461-011-9963-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10461-011-9963-5

Keywords

Navigation