山东省青岛市男男性行为人群固定性伴无保护性肛交行为的通径分析

卢姗 孙坤 李培龙 葛琳 陶小润 姜珍霞 廖玫珍 郭巍 崔岩 李东民

卢姗, 孙坤, 李培龙, 葛琳, 陶小润, 姜珍霞, 廖玫珍, 郭巍, 崔岩, 李东民. 山东省青岛市男男性行为人群固定性伴无保护性肛交行为的通径分析[J]. 疾病监测, 2018, 33(10): 844-848. doi: 10.3784/j.issn.1003-9961.2018.10.013
引用本文: 卢姗, 孙坤, 李培龙, 葛琳, 陶小润, 姜珍霞, 廖玫珍, 郭巍, 崔岩, 李东民. 山东省青岛市男男性行为人群固定性伴无保护性肛交行为的通径分析[J]. 疾病监测, 2018, 33(10): 844-848. doi: 10.3784/j.issn.1003-9961.2018.10.013
Shan Lu, Kun Sun, Peilong Li, Lin Ge, Xiaorun Tao, Zhenxia Jiang, Meizhen Liao, Wei Guo, Yan Cui, Dongmin Li. Path analysis on unprotected anal intercourse with regular sexual partners in men who have sex with men in Qingdao[J]. Disease Surveillance, 2018, 33(10): 844-848. doi: 10.3784/j.issn.1003-9961.2018.10.013
Citation: Shan Lu, Kun Sun, Peilong Li, Lin Ge, Xiaorun Tao, Zhenxia Jiang, Meizhen Liao, Wei Guo, Yan Cui, Dongmin Li. Path analysis on unprotected anal intercourse with regular sexual partners in men who have sex with men in Qingdao[J]. Disease Surveillance, 2018, 33(10): 844-848. doi: 10.3784/j.issn.1003-9961.2018.10.013

山东省青岛市男男性行为人群固定性伴无保护性肛交行为的通径分析

doi: 10.3784/j.issn.1003-9961.2018.10.013
详细信息
    作者简介:

    卢姗,女,吉林省珲春市人,硕士研究生,主要从事男男性行为者艾滋病相关性行为研究

    通讯作者:

    李东民,Tel:010–58900955,Email:lidongmin@chinaaids.cn

  • 中图分类号: R512.91

Path analysis on unprotected anal intercourse with regular sexual partners in men who have sex with men in Qingdao

More Information
  • 摘要: 目的了解山东省青岛市男男性行为者(MSM)艾滋病知识、自我认同及社会支持情况对固定性伴无保护性肛交(UAI)行为的作用方式及大小。方法采用滚雪球法招募MSM,调查其艾滋病知识、性行为特征等;采用同性恋态度量表和社会支持评定量表分别收集自我认同和社会支持信息。 定量资料和计数资料比较分别采用t检验和χ2检验,采用Pearson 相关和多重线性回归进行相关和影响因素分析;通径分析中参数估计方法为均数方差调整加权最小二乘法,中介效应检验采用Bootstrap法。结果共招募529人,66.54%有多个(≥2)同性固定性伴;多个固定性伴者的UAI发生比例(88.92%)高于单一固定性伴者(51.98%),P<0.001。 单一固定性伴者中,有UAI行为的MSM艾滋病相关知识得分较低(t=–2.780),自我认同得分较低(t=–2.000),社会支持得分较高(t=2.670,P<0.05)。 多个固定性伴者中,有UAI行为的MSM艾滋病相关知识得分较低(t= –3.550, P<0.001)。 通径分析结果显示:单一固定性伴者中,社会支持和UAI诱发情境对固定性伴UAI行为有正向直接作用,作用大小分别为0.24和0.45;多个固定性伴者中,艾滋病相关知识对固定性伴UAI行为产生负向直接效应,作用大小为–0.42,同时通过UAI诱发情境对UAI行为产生正向间接效应,Bstd=0.04,经Bootstrap检验,P<0.05。结论青岛市MSM固定性伴无保护性肛交行为发生比例较高,缺乏艾滋病知识和社会支持得分高可增加无保护性肛交行为发生风险。
  • 图  1  单一固定性伴者艾滋病相关知识、自我认同与社会支持对固定性伴无保护性肛交行为影响的通径

                注:a表示P<0.05

    Figure  1.  Influences of AIDS related knowledge, self-identity and social support on UAI in MSM with single regular partner

    图  2  多个固定性伴者艾滋病相关知识、自我认同与社会支持对固定性伴无保护性肛交行为影响的通径

                注:a表示P<0.05

    Figure  2.  Influences of AIDS related knowledge, self-identity and social support on UAI in MSM with multi regular partners

    表  1  男男性行为人群同性固定性伴无保护性肛交行为流行率单因素分析

    Table  1.   Univariate analysis on prevalence of UAI with regular male partners among MSM

    变量 单一固定性伴者(N1=177) 多个固定性伴者(N2=352)
    是(n=92) 否(n=85) t/χ2 P 是(n=313) 否(n=39) t/χ2 P
    艾滋病相关知识得分a 6.34 6.91 –2.780 0.006 6.07 6.95 –3.550 <0.001
    同性性取向自我认同得分a 14.11 15.25 –2.000 0.047 14.92 14.59 0.530 0.599
    社会支持得分a 35.52 33.81 2.670 0.008 36.77 36.29 0.570 0.567
    UAI诱发情境
     性角色为被动插入方 62 (67.39) 50 (58.82) 1.396 0.237 233 (74.44) 20 (51.28) 9.201 0.002
     最近一次肛交行为前吸毒 40 (43.48) 12 (14.12) 18.357 <0.001 174 (55.59) 16 (41.03) 2.962 0.085
     有吸毒性伴 43 (46.74) 15 (17.65) 16.973 <0.001 214 (68.37) 22 (56.41) 2.245 0.134
     有同性临时和(或)商业性伴 70 (76.09) 40 (47.06) 15.825 <0.001 223 (71.25) 31 (79.49) 1.172 0.279
    总分a 2.34 1.38 5.520 <0.001 2.70 2.28 2.050 0.041
      注:a 定量变量,用均数描述,组间比较统计量为t;其余为分类变量,用频数(构成比)描述,组间比较统计量为χ2
    下载: 导出CSV

    表  2  各变量对固定性伴无保护性肛交行为的预测作用

    Table  2.   Predicting effects of each variate on UAI with regular male partner

    变量 单一固定性伴者 多个(≥2)固定性伴者
    直接效应 间接效应 直接效应 间接效应
    Bstd(95%CI P Bstd (95%CI P Bstd(95%CI P Bstd (95%CI P
    艾滋病相关知识 –0.19(–0.41,0.04) 0.098 –0.42(–0.65,–0.21) <0.001 0.04(0.01,0.09) 0.043
    同性性取向自我认同 –0.10(–0.35,0.12) 0.417 –0.06(–0.13,0.01) 0.102 0.11 (–0.21,0.30) 0.391
    社会支持 0.24 (0.08,0.41) 0.006 0.04 (–0.15,0.23) 0.699 –0.01(–0.04,0.01) 0.352
    UAI诱发情境 0.45 (0.28,0.59) <0.001 0.24 ( 0.06,0.40) 0.005
      注:Bstd为标准化偏回归系数
    下载: 导出CSV
  • [1] Zhong F, Lin P, Xu HF, et al. Possible increase in HIV and syphilis prevalence among men who have sex with men in Guangzhou, China: results from a respondent-driven sampling survey[J]. AIDS Behav, 2011,15(5):1058–1066. DOI: 10.1007/s10461–009–9619–x
    [2] Wu J, Hu YF, Jia YJ, et al. Prevalence of unprotected anal intercourse among men who have sex with men in China: an updated meta-analysis[J]. PLoS One, 2014,9(5):e98366. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0098366
    [3] Huebner DM, Kegeles SM, Rebchook GM, et al. Social oppression, psychological vulnerability, and unprotected intercourse among young Black men who have sex with men[J]. Health Psychol, 2014,33(12):1568–1578. DOI: 10.1037/hea0000031
    [4] Ross MW, Kajubi P, Mandel JS, et al. Internalized homonegativity/homophobia is associated with HIV-risk behaviours among Ugandan gay and bisexual men[J]. Int J STD AIDS, 2013,24(5):409–413. DOI: 10.1177/0956462412472793
    [5] Persson KI, Tikkanen R, Bergström J, et al. Experimentals, bottoms, risk-reducers and clubbers: exploring diverse sexual practice in an Internet-active high-risk behaviour group of men who have sex with men in Sweden[J]. Cult Health Sex, 2016,18(6):639–653. DOI: 10.1080/13691058.2015.1103384
    [6] Smolenski DJ, Diamond PM, Ross MW, et al. Revision, criterion validity, and multigroup assessment of the reactions to homosexuality scale[J]. J Pers Assess, 2010,92(6):568–576. DOI: 10.1080/00223891.2010.513300
    [7] 汪向东, 王希林, 马弘. 心理卫生评定量表手册[M]. 北京: 中国心理卫生杂志社, 1999.

    Wang XD, Wang XL, Ma H. Rating scales for mental health[M]. Beijing: Chinese Mental Health Journal , 1999.
    [8] Díaz RM, Ayala G, Bein E. Sexual risk as an outcome of social oppression: data from a probability sample of Latino gay men in three U.S. cities[J]. Cultur Divers Ethnic Minor Psychol, 2004,10(3):255–267. DOI: 10.1037/1099–9809.10.3.255
    [9] Hu J, Zhang MY, Ma JJ, et al. Characteristics and factors influencing unprotected anal intercourse among men who have sex with men in Fuyang, China[J]. Southeast Asian J Trop Med Public Health, 2015,46(4):680–688
    [10] Liu J, Qu B, Ezeakile MC, et al. Factors associated with unprotected anal intercourse among men who have sex with men in Liaoning Province, China[J]. PLoS One, 2012,7(11):e50493. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0050493
    [11] Arnold EA, Sterrett-Hong E, Jonas A, et al. Social networks and social support among ball-attending African American men who have sex with men and transgender women are associated with HIV-related outcomes[J]. Glob Public Health, 2018,13(2):144–158. DOI: 10.1080/17441692.2016.1180702
    [12] Kelly BC, Carpiano RM, Easterbrook A, et al. Sex and the community: the implications of neighbourhoods and social networks for sexual risk behaviours among urban gay men[J]. Sociol Health Illn, 2012,34(7):1085–1102. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467–9566.2011.01446.x
    [13] Melrose KL, Brown GDA, Wood AM. When is received social support related to perceived support and well-being? When it is needed[J]. Person Ind Diff, 2015,77(4):97–105. DOI: 10.1016/j.paid.2014.12.047
    [14] Tran H, Ross MW, Diamond PM, et al. Structural validation and multiple group assessment of the short internalized homonegativity scale in homosexual and bisexual men in 38 european countries: results from the european MSM internet survey[J]. J Sex Res, 2018,55(4/5):617–629. DOI: 10.1080/00224499.2017.1380158
    [15] Newcomb ME, Mustanski B. Moderators of the relationship between internalized homophobia and risky sexual behavior in men who have sex with men: a meta-analysis[J]. Arch Sex Behav, 2011,40(1):189–199. DOI: 10.1007/s10508–009–9573–8
  • 2018-0101山东省青岛市男男性行为人群固定性伴无保护性肛交行为的通径分析.docx
  • 加载中
图(2) / 表(2)
计量
  • 文章访问数:  1829
  • HTML全文浏览量:  479
  • PDF下载量:  20
  • 被引次数: 0
出版历程
  • 收稿日期:  2018-03-05
  • 网络出版日期:  2018-10-29
  • 刊出日期:  2018-10-01

目录

    /

    返回文章
    返回

    在线交流

    防诈骗公告

    近期有不法分子以本刊编辑身份添加作者微信,请务必提高警惕!本刊关于稿件的一切事项通知均采用编辑部唯一邮箱(jbjc@icdc.cn)和座机(010-58900732)联系作者,且在录用稿件后仅收取版面费,无其他任何名目费用(如审稿费和加急费等),非编辑部邮箱发送的本刊收费用通知等均为诈骗,不要随意汇入款项!如有可疑及时致电编辑部核实确认!