IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0238748.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Acceptability of a trial of vaginal progesterone for the prevention of preterm birth among HIV-infected women in Lusaka, Zambia: A mixed methods study

Author

Listed:
  • Joan T Price
  • Chileshe M Mabula-Bwalya
  • Bethany L Freeman
  • Jessica Carda-Auten
  • Winifreda M Phiri
  • Kasapo Chibwe
  • Patricia Kantumoya
  • Bellington Vwalika
  • Jeffrey S A Stringer
  • Carol E Golin

Abstract

Antenatal progesterone prevents preterm birth (PTB) in women with a short cervix or prior PTB in daily vaginal or weekly injectable formulations, respectively. Neither has been tested for the indication of maternal HIV, which is associated with an elevated risk of PTB. The Vaginal Progesterone (VP) Trial was a pilot feasibility study of VP to prevent HIV-related PTB in Lusaka, Zambia. Using mixed methods, we concurrently evaluated the acceptability of the trial and the study product among participants. Over a 1-year period, we enrolled 140 pregnant women living with HIV into a double-masked, placebo-controlled, randomized trial of daily self-administered VP or placebo. We administered an endline questionnaire to all participants and conducted in-depth interviews with 30 participants to assess barriers and facilitators to uptake and retention in the trial and to study product adherence. All interviews were audiotaped, transcribed, translated into English as needed, and independently coded by two analysts to capture emerging themes. Of 131 participants who completed the questionnaire, 128 (98%) reported that nothing was difficult when asked the hardest part about using the study product. When given a hypothetical choice between vaginal and injectable progesterone, 97 (74%) chose vaginal, 31 (24%) injectable, and 3 (2%) stated no preference. Most interviewees reported no difficulties with using the study product; others cited minor side effects and surmountable challenges. Strategies that supported adherence included setting alarms, aligning dosing with antiretrovirals, receiving encouragement from friends and family, sensing a benefit to their unborn baby, and positive feedback from study staff. Participants who reported preference of a vaginal medication over injectable described familiarity with the vaginal product, a fear of needles and resulting pain, and inconvenience of a weekly clinic visit. Those who would prefer weekly injections cited fewer doses to remember. Perceived barriers to study participation included mistrust about the motivations behind research, suspicion of Satanism, and futility or possible harm from a placebo. We report key influences on acceptability of a randomized trial of VP to prevent PTB among HIV-infected women in Zambia, which should inform methods to promote uptake, adherence, and retention in a full-scale trial.

Suggested Citation

  • Joan T Price & Chileshe M Mabula-Bwalya & Bethany L Freeman & Jessica Carda-Auten & Winifreda M Phiri & Kasapo Chibwe & Patricia Kantumoya & Bellington Vwalika & Jeffrey S A Stringer & Carol E Golin, 2020. "Acceptability of a trial of vaginal progesterone for the prevention of preterm birth among HIV-infected women in Lusaka, Zambia: A mixed methods study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(9), pages 1-19, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0238748
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0238748
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0238748
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0238748&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0238748?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0238748. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.