Journal of AIDS & Clinical Research

Are People Controlling the Danger or Fear for Condom Use as HIV/AIDS Preventive Message? An Evaluative Type of Study Based on Extended Parallel Process Model

Abstract

Feleke Doyore, Zewdie Birhanu, Yohannes Kebede, Tariku Dejene and Dube Jara

Background: There almost three decade years after the first clinical cases of AIDS were reported; it has become the most devastating disease of world particplarly in developing world. Despite massive resources and intensified interventions were made in promoting condom use as prevention methods, desired decline has not been achieved. This study was aimed to evaluate how people controlling the Danger or Fear for condom use as HIV/AIDS preventive message among youths exposed to messages and the response they experience on messages.

Methods: Cross-sectional study design was conducted using quantitative and qualitative methods of data collection. Pre-tested self administered questionnaires were used to collect data. Study participants were selected using stratified random sampling from hosanna public college students. Quantitative data were analyzed using SPSS version 16.0. Thematic analysis was use for qualitative data.

Results: Hundred ninty one (48.1%) of the respodents were found in danger control responses, whereas 206 (51.9%) were found in fear control responses. Perceived susceptibility to and severity of HIV/AIDS was relatively high; however, perceived self efficacy and response efficacy to HIV prevention messages had lower scores. Perceived susceptibility [β (95%CI)=1.07 (1.21 to 7.10)] and severity of [β (95%CI=1.65 (1.25 to 21.81)] HIV/AIDS were positively associated factors for fear control responses. Self efficacy [β (95%CI)=-0.96 (0.16 to 0.92)] and response efficacy [β (95%CI)=-1.21 (0.11 to 0.83)] were negatively associated factors. Totally, 66.3% of the variance in the response of condom use message as HIV prevention could be explained by EPPM model.

Conclusion: Despite higher numbers of students were in fear control psychological responses, there were gaps between discriminative scores and most of the current behavior. Perceived susceptiblity, severity, self efficacy and response efficacy were independent predictors of students’ perceptions to use recommended responses. Due attention should given to fill the gap of perception of both susceptibility and severity.